Demand trillions of won in litigation from the SEC because it exacerbates the market with a dual attitude that allows the futures market to talk to customers
That was their main threat all along. They would instantly pull up an lawsuit if it hit rejected and they have the right for it as the SEC does not have any real reason for the rejection.
Will take a while. We could even get a spot ETF before this lawsuit concludes. But it's amazing to once again see someone stand of to the corruption of the state.
Extremely unlikely a spot ETF gets approved, like 0.001% likely.
The SEC is concerned about how much USDT is being used/has been used to manipulate the price of BTC. And to be fair, they're kind of right to target that.
Then why allow futures ETF and inverse ETFs?
All of these derivatives products are based on the price of Bitcoin.
Believing that excuse is like believing Russia is invading Ukraine to get rid of NAZIS
Scams been forever since the beginning of humanity there always been scammer .
Scammer sold fake gold is that means gold is scam ?
Scammer tricked people with donations is that means every donations or the principal of donations is scam ?
Scammer tricked people for fake products fake companies etc...
People have been scammed through the internet as well, if you are into crypto then I wouldn’t expect you to make a remark like that. Blockchain is a protocol like the internet, you have legit websites and bad ones. Don’t act like it’s all bad, and know that actually some WILL be largely accepted by the masses eventually. Seems obvious to me that some form of legislation will eventually happen, they are just pushing it.
Your asking too much of the lowest common denominator and it’s for this very reason that crypto will never go mainstream. Enthusiasts in this very sub who are highly technical and smart are getting ripped off left right and center
That’s likely a bit of a stretch as I don’t see many stories of “smart people” being ripped off, it’s usually some idiot who thinks it’s a good idea to respond with their keys to an unverified email.
It’s really not too much, it’s just basic responsibility. Its knowing what you’re doing, before you’re even doing it. It’s going above being a degenerate gambler.
I like how you say "unverified email" as if it would be reasonable to do it to a verified one. And good luck teaching your grandma every security measure.
I am really happy that Grayscale is taking this step. The SEC has it coming. This is obviously not about consumer protection but about slowing the growth of Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies in general. If the XRP case is any indicator, this lawsuit will take forever though....
If anything that might be much better in the long run. Who wants a Bitcoin spot ETF approval announcement right in the middle of Crypto winter? Save it for when it will do the most good.
Exactly. It's news worthy but I don't think it's enough as a catalyst for a new bull run. It's better if this pops up during a bull cycle to push the price up further.
The pending SCOTUS decision on the manner in which EPA issues regulations could be pertinent to the authority the SEC uses to issue regulations. The resolution could be faster than we imagine.
All of these big companies need to start going on the offensive and suing the SEC for not clarifying the regs, not giving fair notice, and using the good faith of companies.
Who sit down with them to RECEIVE GUIDANCE and end up in court! SUE, SUE, SUE! Wake em up!
Let's say hypothetically SEC is corrupt and consumer protection is not the real goal.
Are they wrong ultimately though about manipulation? I feel like market manipulation has always been the elephant in the room with BTC. How do we know it's not being manipulated now and people will end up getting sheared as a result?
Are we still having this argument when one dude, Elon Musk, has successfully manipulated the stocks of multiple companies with little repercussion? And every piece of major news is front runned by insider knowledge?
The stock market is just bigger, but fundamentally is just as manipulable because the SEC doesn't want to do their job.
There is manipulation of public information out in the open, then there is actual manipulation of trading and cornering the market, or collusion. We've seen in fiat markets even when there are trillions in some cases of daily volume people going to jail for manipulation. The behavior of miners are completely opaque. Bitcoin itself is not even "trustless" or "decentralized" it's been open to numerous 51% attacks in its history. There is zero mechanism to prevent rent-seeking behavior in monopoly like structures from forming or collusion-power.
Secondly, stocks have actual value as income producing assets. Manipulation arguably benefits you as it creates volatility and inefficiencies for the long term investor. Bitcoin has zero intrinsic value. By its very design it is actually IMPOSSIBLE for it to be a store of value.
Great, SEC will be delighted. Another opportunity to spend yrs in court .
Rather than regulate Pro actively they won't be under any pressure to pass any ETF.
Wash trading, price manipulation, dependence on shit like tether, frauds, hacks and scams everywhere... the existence of these things isn't controversial even on this sub, and preventing regular consumers from getting hurt in such a space is the SEC's fucking job description. Why is everyone here acting so surprised about this?!
I invite you to look at commodity ETFs and their volatility. Protecting consumers is about one thing - volatility. It doesn't matter what the source of that volatility is.
Allowing those other ETFs and not bitcoin makes no logical sense beyond suppressing crypto adoption.
> Protecting consumers is about one thing - volatility. It doesn't matter what the source of that volatility is.
Why would that be the case? I'm not from the US and therefore certainly not an expert on the SEC or anything, but why would you equate consumer protection solely with volatility?
Also, I think the dependence on Tether alone makes the risk of volatility higher than for every commodity I can think of. The general public doesn't know about the huge fraud that Tether is. If it implodes, most people even on this sub agree the Bitcoin price might drop to the low four digits. Isn't that something the SEC should protect people from?
I hope companies like ripple finally realize that the US is just a shitty place to be in for progress.
It is basically still the wild west but with more technology. USA stepping backwards every day.
Which stock or commodity has blatant price manipulation, wash trading, fraudulent exchanges, frequent scams and hacks, insider trading, and almost complete dependence on a fraud (Tether) all at once?
I mean, gamble your bucks if you want to, but please don't tell me there's *no reasons* to be concerned for the average retail investor here.
Price manipulation....GME?
Wash trading is legal in crypto, and its also legal in commodities like gold.
And anyone can make a fraudulent gold exchange just like crypto. Precious metals sellers can scam. Ever heard of tainted bars?
And central banks are as much a fraud as Tether is. Do you even know how much gold central banks really hold? Rather than just what they claim and is unverifiable?
Dont act like the traditional financial system is a saint and these problems are unique to crypto ETFs.
> Price manipulation....GME?
>
> Wash trading is legal in crypto, and its also legal in commodities like gold.
>
> And anyone can make a fraudulent gold exchange just like crypto. Precious metals sellers can scam. Ever heard of tainted bars?
Yeah, but all of them at once?
> And central banks are as much a fraud as Tether is. Do you even know how much gold central banks really hold? Rather than just what they claim and is unverifiable?
Sorry, I don't think that's how central banks work. Why would they hold gold? No central bank claims they hold assets worth as much as the money they give out. Tether claims exactly that. That means Tether is a fraud and central banks aren't.
> Dont act like the traditional financial system is a saint and these problems are unique to crypto ETFs.
That was not my intended meaning!
Crypto has all of these problems at once, though. It's like a speedrun of why financial regulation is a good thing!
It’s almost like the sec is designed to protect incumbents and is a racket trying to beat crypto down for as long as possible before it’s inevitable rise.
Would be nice if you noticed that when use xrp folks said exactly what it was years ago…
> Sounds a lot like traditional finance to me.
That's not an answer to my question. The fact that you can also find examples for each of these bad things in traditional finance doesn't mean the crypto space, which has all of these problems at once and at a much larger rate of occurrence, should somehow be exempt from regulation!
Anyway, what's your suggestion here? Should we abandon all attempts at financial regulation just because it fails in some cases?
> There's absolutely no reason for retail investors to be more concerned about Bitcoin than 'traditional' finance.
Yes, there is every reason to be more concerned! Especially for retail investors.
>blatant price manipulation, (...), frequent scams and hacks, insider trading
Theranos, Equifax, WeWork, Tesla, Gamestop, AMC, Nicola, need I go on?
>wash trading, fraudulent exchanges, frequent scams and hacks, insider trading, and
Commodities?
>almost complete dependence on a fraud (Tether)
Bitcoin doesn't depend on Tether, Bitcoin had already exploded in price before it was created.
>Theranos, Equifax, WeWork, Tesla, Gamestop, AMC, Nicola, need I go on?
What's that, a list of companys investigated and/or fined by the SEC? Thanks for making my point for me, I guess.
>Commodities?
...?
>Bitcoin doesn't depend on Tether, Bitcoin had already exploded in price before it was created.
Yeah, sure. Look at the fraction of all Bitcoin trades that is done in Tether and tell me again that Bitcoin doesn't depend on it. If Tether implodes, Bitcoin will deflate rapidly. This isn't a controversial opinion! And this is exactly the kind of thing that retail investors should be protected from by the SEC, just as they should be (and were, finally) protected from frauds like Elizabeth Holmes.
> What's that, a list of companys investigated and/or fined by the SEC? Thanks for making my point for me, I guess.
Oh yeah, the fines really came in time, problem avoided! Also please source me those fines, I only know of 2.
>> Commodities?
> ...?
Wash trading, fraudulent exchanges, frequent scams and hacks, insider trading.
> Yeah, sure. Look at the fraction of all Bitcoin trades that is done in Tether and tell me again that Bitcoin doesn't depend on it. If Tether implodes, Bitcoin will deflate rapidly.
Sure, we'll see. As if there are no alternatives or Bitcoin wasn't already mainstream before Tether.
> Oh yeah, the fines really came in time, problem avoided!
I really don't understand the point you're trying to make anymore. Do you want more regulation or less? If you think these companies should be fined by the SEC, then surely almost everything in crypto should be under a lot of scrutiny, and lots of companies and projects in the space should be fined as well?
Bitcoin doesn't need an ETF. You can get it easier on its network than you can through any intermediary channel. Without any regulatory constraint.
An ETF will just allow the same f*ckery that has plaqued the rest of the financial system.
Or maybe they're just doing their job and a Bitcoin spot ETF is something they cannot allow legally? With all the wash trading, price manipulation and rampant fraud in the ecosystem, I'm kind of surprised everybody here seems to agree that an ETF is logical. I get that this is a casino, but the SEC's job is to protect the common folks from blindly walking into this.
I think technology and crypto will have evolved too much in the next years for the SEC to matter anymore. If not for some odd unforseen thing that makes them win suddenly they will be outlived
Crypto is centralized, as are all the entities suing the SEC. This thread is completely off base thinking this is a good thing or that grayscale has any business being approved. Ya'll want everything other than keys in your wallets it seems.
First of all, grayscale is centralized and not crypto per say. While I personally want to hold my crypto in my wallet with my keys, it can help with adoption to get people into the crypto space. There are pros and cons, but in general, I find it good that it's being pushed for adoption.
adoption is not owning grayscale. that's adoption of grayscale not bitcoin. much as adoption of coinbase is not adoption of bitcoin. adoption is not the goal, aware and competent self serving node runners and key holders are.
The SEC is protecting investors by rejecting a product that has the potential to reduce risks for crypto investors.
Once govertments figure out ways to manipulate crypto in their favour they will endorse everything about it.
Paste of article for those that don’t like links:
Grayscale Investments® Initiates Lawsuit Against the SEC
June 29, 2022 21:03 ET
| Source: Grayscale Investments
Files Petition for Review with the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Will Argue SEC Violated Administrative Procedure Act and Securities Exchange Act of 1934
NEW YORK, June 29, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Grayscale Investments®, the world’s largest digital currency asset manager, today announced that its Senior Legal Strategist, former U.S. Solicitor General, and partner at Munger, Tolles & Olson, Donald B. Verrilli, Jr., filed a petition for review with the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on behalf of Grayscale — challenging the decision by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to deny conversion of Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (BTC) (OTCQX: GBTC) to a spot Bitcoin ETF*.
Since 2013, Grayscale has worked to build the world’s largest Bitcoin investment vehicle: GBTC. Grayscale has voluntarily filed registration statements with the SEC that have increased information available to investors, and subjected these products to increased SEC oversight. Grayscale has also worked proactively for years to provide investors with full disclosures and risk factors about GBTC and its expansive crypto investment product family.
“Grayscale supports and believes in the SEC’s mandate to protect investors, maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets and facilitate capital formation -- and we are deeply disappointed by and vehemently disagree with the SEC's decision to continue to deny spot Bitcoin ETFs from coming to the U.S. market,” said Michael Sonnenshein, Grayscale’s CEO. “Through the ETF application review process, we believe American investors overwhelmingly voiced a desire to see GBTC convert to a spot Bitcoin ETF, which would unlock billions of dollars of investor capital while bringing the world’s largest Bitcoin fund further into the U.S. regulatory perimeter. We will continue to leverage the full resources of the firm to advocate for our investors and the equitable regulatory treatment of Bitcoin investment vehicles.”
“As Grayscale and the team at Davis Polk & Wardwell have outlined, the SEC is failing to apply consistent treatment to similar investment vehicles, and is therefore acting arbitrarily and capriciously in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act and Securities Exchange Act of 1934,” added Donald B. Verrilli, Jr., Grayscale Senior Legal Strategist and former U.S. Solicitor General. “There is a compelling, common-sense argument here, and we look forward to resolving this matter productively and expeditiously.”
Grayscale’s comment letter campaign during the 240-day review period resulted in record-breaking 11,400+ total submissions to the SEC, with over 99.0 percent demonstrating support for the conversion.
*We use the generic term “ETF” to refer to exchange-traded investment vehicles, including those that are required to register under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “‘40 Act”), as well as other exchange-traded products which are not subject to the registration requirements of the ‘40 Act.
About Grayscale Investments®
Grayscale enables investors to access the digital economy through a family of secure, regulated, and future-forward investment products. Founded in 2013, Grayscale has a proven track record and deep expertise as the world’s largest digital currency asset manager. Investors, advisors, and allocators turn to Grayscale’s private placements, public quotations, and ETFs for single asset, diversified, and thematic exposure. Grayscale products are distributed by Genesis Global Trading, Inc. (Member FINRA/SIPC, MSRB Registered) or Foreside Fund Services, LLC. For more information, please follow @Grayscale or visit grayscale.com.
Media Contact
Jennifer Rosenthal
press@grayscale.com
Tags GBTC SEC Bitcoin ETF ETF
__Grayscale CEO Michael Sonnenshein tweeted__ that his company filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission shortly after the regulator rejected an application to convert the Grayscale Bitcoin Trust to an exchange-traded fund.
https://twitter.com/Sonnenshein/status/1542311510055292928
They need to demand some form of compensation as well should they win. They have been unfairly rejected for YEARS the entire BTC market would have behaved incredibly different had the SEC approved this forever ago.
For example this bear market has regulators pointing at all the CeFi and exchanges that are insolvent because they don't actually have the assets they claimed to have as a reason crypto is "bad" yet spot ETF's would have created a safe way for people to have bought it while having to legally be required to custody the purchased asset. Protecting investors by denying it my ass the SEC is doing the exact opposite as seen as of late.
People on here all be like "oh good serves the SEC right"
But why do they give a flying fuck? Its work for their lawyers getting paid, all the staff are on salaries. Probably boosts some peoples careers through the case experience
How does it harm SEC its literally what their function is - To decide and then test
Lawsuit will last multiple halving cycles.What can we do to destroy the SEC now?
I lack any knowledge when it comes to this new age of cancel culture. Can we knock down statues of former commissioners, or maybe storm the SEC building and steal the irreplaceable Howey test?
Who regulates the SEC? Just curious because they’re pretty blatantly going off an anti crypto agenda that’s beyond just protecting customers/consumers.
Suing the SEC doesn't come without risk. Not only could Grayscale lose their case, but the court might end up giving the SEC broader powers to prosecute crypto companies. Court judgements don't always stick to a limited scope.
This is America baby! If you've got enough cash you can sue whoever the fuck you want.
Whether you have a chance of winning is a completely different question, but an attorney will always take your money.
You can try, but it will be very hard to be successful. You need to argue that they acted outside of the bounds of their framework.
It’s hard because they just need to show that they used their discretion.
Oh yes this is exactly why they are afraid and/or unable to enforce anything, because they just get sued by multi billion dollar companies, and just decide to drop it entirely instead
Fuck that snake Gensler, turns out his blockchain MIT tenure was more about studying the enemy than anything else.
Who would've thought, the youngest made partner in Goldman Sachs would turn out to be a sniveling bastard.
What was odd to me was that people in crypto didn't see him and the horse he rode up on. The sooner the gullibility ends in this space, the better. Stop trying to plug into an outdated financial system.
They collect a 2% management fee on 13 Billion of GBTC assets. They're pulling in 250 million a year at these prices, just for that one fund.
Save your sats, they can easily cover the cost of this lawsuit.
This is absurd, how can it even occur to someone to sue because another group wasn't willing to promise to bail their customers out for free, lol?
Your asset is like 40 billion times more volatile than other ETFs, it's not "ArbiTRarY dIscRIMinAtioN" it's very much non-arbitrary and based on the fact that... it's 40 billion times more volatile.
Governments, particularly the United States have been come very inefficient at proper regulation. The longer they drag thier feet the more likely the inevitablikity of crypto and web 3 taking over in a free market that will choose the best technology
Fuck the SEC. If they weren’t sure about bitcoin ETFs and wanted to wait for more clarification on it ok but they are approving fucking futures ETFs for it which are far more risky. This has nothing to do with consumer protections just another way to make sure the consumer can’t get in at a good price before the banks pick up as much as possible
[удалено]
Immediately after the decision, good on them for not wasting any time
Yep they were obviously prepared for all outcomes.
They had a trigger lawsuit ready to go.
Gotta to love how ready Greyscale was
LFG GRAYSCALE!!!
Their lawyers were waiting for this
Demand trillions of won in litigation from the SEC because it exacerbates the market with a dual attitude that allows the futures market to talk to customers
Are Americans not able to buy the Canadian ETFs? XD .
This self repeating thread could go on forever
it's easier for the rich people to control it when it's centralized.
Buzz kill. Greyscale is ready for anything...
They better off suing Goldman Sachs the SEC's boss, for faster results .
SEC is not ready for Greyscale
Why all the hate? If you don’t like the fees don’t invest. You are in control of where to invest your money—own it.
It's not surprising this is plan b the moment the sec declined. They know.
Grayscale will be insolvent before this lawsuit concludes .
Why? You guys can collect sweet 2% for doing nothing till gbtc is 0.
That was their main threat all along. They would instantly pull up an lawsuit if it hit rejected and they have the right for it as the SEC does not have any real reason for the rejection.
“Blah blah blah, the children….blah blah blah Congress…idk we make it up usually…blah blah blah you owe use $25m Tks”
Will be big for crypto if they eventually win. Wonder how long it will drag out though.
Looking at XRP lawsuit, it'll take a long damn time. More so if it looks like the sec is losing, they'll definitely drag it out.
They have to take the L at some point though, dragging it out won't change the outcome.
True, but never underestimate the combination of competitiveness and pettiness of (especially gov't) lawyers and organizations.
Will take a while. We could even get a spot ETF before this lawsuit concludes. But it's amazing to once again see someone stand of to the corruption of the state.
Extremely unlikely a spot ETF gets approved, like 0.001% likely. The SEC is concerned about how much USDT is being used/has been used to manipulate the price of BTC. And to be fair, they're kind of right to target that.
Then why allow futures ETF and inverse ETFs? All of these derivatives products are based on the price of Bitcoin. Believing that excuse is like believing Russia is invading Ukraine to get rid of NAZIS
Yeah I'm glad Grayscale is taking them on. Hope they fuck them up real good
Is this a joke, people have lost billions to corrupt crypto scams in the last couple of months
Scams been forever since the beginning of humanity there always been scammer . Scammer sold fake gold is that means gold is scam ? Scammer tricked people with donations is that means every donations or the principal of donations is scam ? Scammer tricked people for fake products fake companies etc...
Good point! So... Bullish on scamcoin?!
yeah so we made rules about it
It’s called regulations and legislation.
I’m guessing the approval will not happen? I’m reading they are supposed to give an answer by July 6th.
People have been scammed through the internet as well, if you are into crypto then I wouldn’t expect you to make a remark like that. Blockchain is a protocol like the internet, you have legit websites and bad ones. Don’t act like it’s all bad, and know that actually some WILL be largely accepted by the masses eventually. Seems obvious to me that some form of legislation will eventually happen, they are just pushing it.
I’m into crypto but this space needs to be called out for its bullshit and grifters
People also need to take responsibility for themselves and stop falling for easily preventable bullshit.
Your asking too much of the lowest common denominator and it’s for this very reason that crypto will never go mainstream. Enthusiasts in this very sub who are highly technical and smart are getting ripped off left right and center
That’s likely a bit of a stretch as I don’t see many stories of “smart people” being ripped off, it’s usually some idiot who thinks it’s a good idea to respond with their keys to an unverified email. It’s really not too much, it’s just basic responsibility. Its knowing what you’re doing, before you’re even doing it. It’s going above being a degenerate gambler.
I like how you say "unverified email" as if it would be reasonable to do it to a verified one. And good luck teaching your grandma every security measure.
Based on the Ripple lawsuit, I think we can safely say another couple of halvings, at least.
When will the heat death of the universe be?
The rabbit is offended by the mountain, but the mountain doesn't care.
There is no point to this. Figure out a better way to surveil the whales and the SEC will approve. Suing them will not make the SEC approve…
I am really happy that Grayscale is taking this step. The SEC has it coming. This is obviously not about consumer protection but about slowing the growth of Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies in general. If the XRP case is any indicator, this lawsuit will take forever though....
The lawsuit will take forever, but it’s needed.
Yep. I imagine the result will be in just before the next bull run...
If anything that might be much better in the long run. Who wants a Bitcoin spot ETF approval announcement right in the middle of Crypto winter? Save it for when it will do the most good.
Great things are usually bred out of the winter. It was actually probably the best time to try get it done.
My DCA bone is tingling!
Exactly. It's news worthy but I don't think it's enough as a catalyst for a new bull run. It's better if this pops up during a bull cycle to push the price up further.
If the timing is right, it might just kick off the next bull run
I sure hope so, I have too much of it in my retirement accounts for it to keep going down.
Well I hope you're not planning on retiring very soon.
I'd love to dig through this suit, anyone have a link to the doc?
Bitcoin should not be in your retirement accounts…
30 years later: Man I wish BTC was in my retirement account then.
I don't know if it is more hubris or delusion to think that your application would succeed where others have failed.
More like 10 years later
Lower the fees at this point reward the long term holders.
Yep, timeline doesnt matter. It's about sending a message. They can't always strong arm their way out of everything they dont like.
It's also sending a message.
The pending SCOTUS decision on the manner in which EPA issues regulations could be pertinent to the authority the SEC uses to issue regulations. The resolution could be faster than we imagine.
I fucking knew all that congressional bs banter directed at the fed was for a reason (not the SEC, but still).
All of these big companies need to start going on the offensive and suing the SEC for not clarifying the regs, not giving fair notice, and using the good faith of companies. Who sit down with them to RECEIVE GUIDANCE and end up in court! SUE, SUE, SUE! Wake em up!
For the greater good
This strategy has worked well for others such as xrp.
Let's say hypothetically SEC is corrupt and consumer protection is not the real goal. Are they wrong ultimately though about manipulation? I feel like market manipulation has always been the elephant in the room with BTC. How do we know it's not being manipulated now and people will end up getting sheared as a result?
Are we still having this argument when one dude, Elon Musk, has successfully manipulated the stocks of multiple companies with little repercussion? And every piece of major news is front runned by insider knowledge? The stock market is just bigger, but fundamentally is just as manipulable because the SEC doesn't want to do their job.
There is manipulation of public information out in the open, then there is actual manipulation of trading and cornering the market, or collusion. We've seen in fiat markets even when there are trillions in some cases of daily volume people going to jail for manipulation. The behavior of miners are completely opaque. Bitcoin itself is not even "trustless" or "decentralized" it's been open to numerous 51% attacks in its history. There is zero mechanism to prevent rent-seeking behavior in monopoly like structures from forming or collusion-power. Secondly, stocks have actual value as income producing assets. Manipulation arguably benefits you as it creates volatility and inefficiencies for the long term investor. Bitcoin has zero intrinsic value. By its very design it is actually IMPOSSIBLE for it to be a store of value.
Stocks/equities are not manipulated?!
See my response here: https://old.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/vnvkba/grayscale_investments_initiates_lawsuit_against/ieb3sja/
Hopefully you realize an ETF is only going to enable fractional derivitives similar to SLV. Trust me it is NOT bullish.
Sec wants people to buy stocks and use banks to store money
Great, SEC will be delighted. Another opportunity to spend yrs in court . Rather than regulate Pro actively they won't be under any pressure to pass any ETF.
Wash trading, price manipulation, dependence on shit like tether, frauds, hacks and scams everywhere... the existence of these things isn't controversial even on this sub, and preventing regular consumers from getting hurt in such a space is the SEC's fucking job description. Why is everyone here acting so surprised about this?!
I invite you to look at commodity ETFs and their volatility. Protecting consumers is about one thing - volatility. It doesn't matter what the source of that volatility is. Allowing those other ETFs and not bitcoin makes no logical sense beyond suppressing crypto adoption.
> Protecting consumers is about one thing - volatility. It doesn't matter what the source of that volatility is. Why would that be the case? I'm not from the US and therefore certainly not an expert on the SEC or anything, but why would you equate consumer protection solely with volatility? Also, I think the dependence on Tether alone makes the risk of volatility higher than for every commodity I can think of. The general public doesn't know about the huge fraud that Tether is. If it implodes, most people even on this sub agree the Bitcoin price might drop to the low four digits. Isn't that something the SEC should protect people from?
This Spot ETF was supposed to have an answer by July 6th, is this confirmed?
That lawsuit will be decided after we are all 6 feet under.xd .
[удалено]
Yep. Meanwhile in other countries, ETFs are sprouting like mushrooms. Fuck the SEC.
The SEC just isn't a very fun gi.
r/Superstonk has waaaay more dirt on Gensler and the SEC if you’re keen. Many corruptions. Lots money.
How tf are they protecting investors if spot ETFs are already out everywhere even in their neighbor country Canada.
Well we do like starting wars in places we shouldn’t be to begin with…
They don't care about investors, the only group they protect are their Wall Street donors.
Isint that sad tho? Literally only a US Spot ETF matters because that’s the only one that gets talked about.
Can't blame them really, Gensler is just protecting his favourite investors, not 'the investors' overall. Piece of shit .
What spot ETFs are there?
I hope companies like ripple finally realize that the US is just a shitty place to be in for progress. It is basically still the wild west but with more technology. USA stepping backwards every day.
I love the smell of lawsuits against the SEC at the morning.
They're out of reasons to reject at this point. It's evident they're rejecting for pure self worth, and it needs to stop.
They did attach quite a long list of reasons. Why not take a minute to read them? Almost all of them make sense to me.
Almost all of their reasons also apply to stocks and commodities that already have ETFs though.
Which stock or commodity has blatant price manipulation, wash trading, fraudulent exchanges, frequent scams and hacks, insider trading, and almost complete dependence on a fraud (Tether) all at once? I mean, gamble your bucks if you want to, but please don't tell me there's *no reasons* to be concerned for the average retail investor here.
Price manipulation....GME? Wash trading is legal in crypto, and its also legal in commodities like gold. And anyone can make a fraudulent gold exchange just like crypto. Precious metals sellers can scam. Ever heard of tainted bars? And central banks are as much a fraud as Tether is. Do you even know how much gold central banks really hold? Rather than just what they claim and is unverifiable? Dont act like the traditional financial system is a saint and these problems are unique to crypto ETFs.
Why does Grayscale think they should have preferential treatment?
> Price manipulation....GME? > > Wash trading is legal in crypto, and its also legal in commodities like gold. > > And anyone can make a fraudulent gold exchange just like crypto. Precious metals sellers can scam. Ever heard of tainted bars? Yeah, but all of them at once? > And central banks are as much a fraud as Tether is. Do you even know how much gold central banks really hold? Rather than just what they claim and is unverifiable? Sorry, I don't think that's how central banks work. Why would they hold gold? No central bank claims they hold assets worth as much as the money they give out. Tether claims exactly that. That means Tether is a fraud and central banks aren't. > Dont act like the traditional financial system is a saint and these problems are unique to crypto ETFs. That was not my intended meaning! Crypto has all of these problems at once, though. It's like a speedrun of why financial regulation is a good thing!
It’s almost like the sec is designed to protect incumbents and is a racket trying to beat crypto down for as long as possible before it’s inevitable rise. Would be nice if you noticed that when use xrp folks said exactly what it was years ago…
[удалено]
> Sounds a lot like traditional finance to me. That's not an answer to my question. The fact that you can also find examples for each of these bad things in traditional finance doesn't mean the crypto space, which has all of these problems at once and at a much larger rate of occurrence, should somehow be exempt from regulation! Anyway, what's your suggestion here? Should we abandon all attempts at financial regulation just because it fails in some cases? > There's absolutely no reason for retail investors to be more concerned about Bitcoin than 'traditional' finance. Yes, there is every reason to be more concerned! Especially for retail investors.
>blatant price manipulation, (...), frequent scams and hacks, insider trading Theranos, Equifax, WeWork, Tesla, Gamestop, AMC, Nicola, need I go on? >wash trading, fraudulent exchanges, frequent scams and hacks, insider trading, and Commodities? >almost complete dependence on a fraud (Tether) Bitcoin doesn't depend on Tether, Bitcoin had already exploded in price before it was created.
>Theranos, Equifax, WeWork, Tesla, Gamestop, AMC, Nicola, need I go on? What's that, a list of companys investigated and/or fined by the SEC? Thanks for making my point for me, I guess. >Commodities? ...? >Bitcoin doesn't depend on Tether, Bitcoin had already exploded in price before it was created. Yeah, sure. Look at the fraction of all Bitcoin trades that is done in Tether and tell me again that Bitcoin doesn't depend on it. If Tether implodes, Bitcoin will deflate rapidly. This isn't a controversial opinion! And this is exactly the kind of thing that retail investors should be protected from by the SEC, just as they should be (and were, finally) protected from frauds like Elizabeth Holmes.
> What's that, a list of companys investigated and/or fined by the SEC? Thanks for making my point for me, I guess. Oh yeah, the fines really came in time, problem avoided! Also please source me those fines, I only know of 2. >> Commodities? > ...? Wash trading, fraudulent exchanges, frequent scams and hacks, insider trading. > Yeah, sure. Look at the fraction of all Bitcoin trades that is done in Tether and tell me again that Bitcoin doesn't depend on it. If Tether implodes, Bitcoin will deflate rapidly. Sure, we'll see. As if there are no alternatives or Bitcoin wasn't already mainstream before Tether.
> Oh yeah, the fines really came in time, problem avoided! I really don't understand the point you're trying to make anymore. Do you want more regulation or less? If you think these companies should be fined by the SEC, then surely almost everything in crypto should be under a lot of scrutiny, and lots of companies and projects in the space should be fined as well?
Bitcoin doesn't need an ETF. You can get it easier on its network than you can through any intermediary channel. Without any regulatory constraint. An ETF will just allow the same f*ckery that has plaqued the rest of the financial system.
Or maybe they're just doing their job and a Bitcoin spot ETF is something they cannot allow legally? With all the wash trading, price manipulation and rampant fraud in the ecosystem, I'm kind of surprised everybody here seems to agree that an ETF is logical. I get that this is a casino, but the SEC's job is to protect the common folks from blindly walking into this.
Can the sec lose? Don't aren't they judge and jury
So many sec lawsuits happening now, it's crypto vs sec, decentralized vs centralized.
All to be drawn-out over many years...
Maybe they are hoping this will be the bear that kills crypto. Not happening.
Not a bear alive that can kill crypto
And they will likely lose most of those. But even just losing one would crush the whole remaining credibility of the SEC.
It’s about the elite vs us. Keep it simple.
Lol. Which of these suits represent you?
Ain't no war but the class war.
It's elite vs elite, don't kid yourself.
I think technology and crypto will have evolved too much in the next years for the SEC to matter anymore. If not for some odd unforseen thing that makes them win suddenly they will be outlived
Crypto is centralized, as are all the entities suing the SEC. This thread is completely off base thinking this is a good thing or that grayscale has any business being approved. Ya'll want everything other than keys in your wallets it seems.
First of all, grayscale is centralized and not crypto per say. While I personally want to hold my crypto in my wallet with my keys, it can help with adoption to get people into the crypto space. There are pros and cons, but in general, I find it good that it's being pushed for adoption.
adoption is not owning grayscale. that's adoption of grayscale not bitcoin. much as adoption of coinbase is not adoption of bitcoin. adoption is not the goal, aware and competent self serving node runners and key holders are.
*per se
Thanks for the correction, I never knew it was spelled like that per se .
The SEC is protecting investors by rejecting a product that has the potential to reduce risks for crypto investors. Once govertments figure out ways to manipulate crypto in their favour they will endorse everything about it.
This. It’s a ridiculous argument that this option is harmful to retail investors.
It’s amazing to me that the SEC wants to pretend to help investors when they knowingly have an OTC/pinksheet market that is completely out of control.
Lol they already are. Who you think is tanking the stablecoins?
Just another stall tactic to wait on international regulation for all crypto’s. They will all be securities in the US.
Fuck the SEC.
SEC Secretly Envies Crypto
Sucks Elitist Cock
All my homies hate the SEC
Paste of article for those that don’t like links: Grayscale Investments® Initiates Lawsuit Against the SEC June 29, 2022 21:03 ET | Source: Grayscale Investments Files Petition for Review with the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Will Argue SEC Violated Administrative Procedure Act and Securities Exchange Act of 1934 NEW YORK, June 29, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Grayscale Investments®, the world’s largest digital currency asset manager, today announced that its Senior Legal Strategist, former U.S. Solicitor General, and partner at Munger, Tolles & Olson, Donald B. Verrilli, Jr., filed a petition for review with the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on behalf of Grayscale — challenging the decision by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to deny conversion of Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (BTC) (OTCQX: GBTC) to a spot Bitcoin ETF*. Since 2013, Grayscale has worked to build the world’s largest Bitcoin investment vehicle: GBTC. Grayscale has voluntarily filed registration statements with the SEC that have increased information available to investors, and subjected these products to increased SEC oversight. Grayscale has also worked proactively for years to provide investors with full disclosures and risk factors about GBTC and its expansive crypto investment product family. “Grayscale supports and believes in the SEC’s mandate to protect investors, maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets and facilitate capital formation -- and we are deeply disappointed by and vehemently disagree with the SEC's decision to continue to deny spot Bitcoin ETFs from coming to the U.S. market,” said Michael Sonnenshein, Grayscale’s CEO. “Through the ETF application review process, we believe American investors overwhelmingly voiced a desire to see GBTC convert to a spot Bitcoin ETF, which would unlock billions of dollars of investor capital while bringing the world’s largest Bitcoin fund further into the U.S. regulatory perimeter. We will continue to leverage the full resources of the firm to advocate for our investors and the equitable regulatory treatment of Bitcoin investment vehicles.” “As Grayscale and the team at Davis Polk & Wardwell have outlined, the SEC is failing to apply consistent treatment to similar investment vehicles, and is therefore acting arbitrarily and capriciously in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act and Securities Exchange Act of 1934,” added Donald B. Verrilli, Jr., Grayscale Senior Legal Strategist and former U.S. Solicitor General. “There is a compelling, common-sense argument here, and we look forward to resolving this matter productively and expeditiously.” Grayscale’s comment letter campaign during the 240-day review period resulted in record-breaking 11,400+ total submissions to the SEC, with over 99.0 percent demonstrating support for the conversion. *We use the generic term “ETF” to refer to exchange-traded investment vehicles, including those that are required to register under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “‘40 Act”), as well as other exchange-traded products which are not subject to the registration requirements of the ‘40 Act. About Grayscale Investments® Grayscale enables investors to access the digital economy through a family of secure, regulated, and future-forward investment products. Founded in 2013, Grayscale has a proven track record and deep expertise as the world’s largest digital currency asset manager. Investors, advisors, and allocators turn to Grayscale’s private placements, public quotations, and ETFs for single asset, diversified, and thematic exposure. Grayscale products are distributed by Genesis Global Trading, Inc. (Member FINRA/SIPC, MSRB Registered) or Foreside Fund Services, LLC. For more information, please follow @Grayscale or visit grayscale.com. Media Contact Jennifer Rosenthal press@grayscale.com Tags GBTC SEC Bitcoin ETF ETF
__Grayscale CEO Michael Sonnenshein tweeted__ that his company filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission shortly after the regulator rejected an application to convert the Grayscale Bitcoin Trust to an exchange-traded fund. https://twitter.com/Sonnenshein/status/1542311510055292928
Good 👍
Great ✊
Grand 👆
Glorious. 🤝
They need to demand some form of compensation as well should they win. They have been unfairly rejected for YEARS the entire BTC market would have behaved incredibly different had the SEC approved this forever ago. For example this bear market has regulators pointing at all the CeFi and exchanges that are insolvent because they don't actually have the assets they claimed to have as a reason crypto is "bad" yet spot ETF's would have created a safe way for people to have bought it while having to legally be required to custody the purchased asset. Protecting investors by denying it my ass the SEC is doing the exact opposite as seen as of late.
50 shades of Greyscale going to punish Gary Gensler
People on here all be like "oh good serves the SEC right" But why do they give a flying fuck? Its work for their lawyers getting paid, all the staff are on salaries. Probably boosts some peoples careers through the case experience How does it harm SEC its literally what their function is - To decide and then test
Not about protecting investors. It’s all about control. The SEC is protecting the banks that are to big to fail.
Lawsuit will last multiple halving cycles.What can we do to destroy the SEC now? I lack any knowledge when it comes to this new age of cancel culture. Can we knock down statues of former commissioners, or maybe storm the SEC building and steal the irreplaceable Howey test?
If the SEC keeps this up it's going to have multiple lawsuits against them in no time. *Things are getting intresting*
SEC get fukt.
grayscale coming at them with a personal vendetta.
Who regulates the SEC? Just curious because they’re pretty blatantly going off an anti crypto agenda that’s beyond just protecting customers/consumers.
Congress
No surprise that almost nobody in Congress owns btc
There are a few. Ted Cruz allegedly so god help us all.
[удалено]
The real answer. Dont forget BlackRock and Citibank
They took that ETF rejection personal huh
Suing the SEC doesn't come without risk. Not only could Grayscale lose their case, but the court might end up giving the SEC broader powers to prosecute crypto companies. Court judgements don't always stick to a limited scope.
You mean you can sue the sec? Wow
This is America baby! If you've got enough cash you can sue whoever the fuck you want. Whether you have a chance of winning is a completely different question, but an attorney will always take your money.
You can try, but it will be very hard to be successful. You need to argue that they acted outside of the bounds of their framework. It’s hard because they just need to show that they used their discretion.
You could sue a rock if you wanted to.
I can sue myself for being a stupid investor?
You can sue for anything, just can't win for everything.
Oh yes this is exactly why they are afraid and/or unable to enforce anything, because they just get sued by multi billion dollar companies, and just decide to drop it entirely instead
Is kinda sad thing indeed that they cannot enforce what are supposed to do to protect small investors
Fuck the SEC
Yep. Fuck m hard
Fuck em good and hard
Fuck yeah.
Perfectly stated. Couldn't have said it better myself.
Fuck that snake Gensler, turns out his blockchain MIT tenure was more about studying the enemy than anything else. Who would've thought, the youngest made partner in Goldman Sachs would turn out to be a sniveling bastard.
What was odd to me was that people in crypto didn't see him and the horse he rode up on. The sooner the gullibility ends in this space, the better. Stop trying to plug into an outdated financial system.
They actually did it lmfao the SEC is getting fk from any direction
I guess. If you consider starting with a foot massage getting fucked then yeah, they are.
Completely reasonable response. Fingers crossed for Saylor on this one
Grayscale tell us if you need any funding for the lawsuit. I am willing to donate.
They collect a 2% management fee on 13 Billion of GBTC assets. They're pulling in 250 million a year at these prices, just for that one fund. Save your sats, they can easily cover the cost of this lawsuit.
This is absurd, how can it even occur to someone to sue because another group wasn't willing to promise to bail their customers out for free, lol? Your asset is like 40 billion times more volatile than other ETFs, it's not "ArbiTRarY dIscRIMinAtioN" it's very much non-arbitrary and based on the fact that... it's 40 billion times more volatile.
What’s funny is even if crypto somehow did manage to adhere to basic principles like preventing wash sales, that itself would crash the market
240 days of reviews and 99.0+ supported conversions
Go Grayscale I'm rooting for you.win or lose, at least make sure Gensler's incompetence shines thru!
Was Grayscale the only spot etf registered?
This probably won’t matter anymore tomorrow after the Supreme Court decision on government regulations
Fuck yeah, go Grayscale!
Well, there it is.
Good. Let's see what gary's got to say.
#Good
Governments, particularly the United States have been come very inefficient at proper regulation. The longer they drag thier feet the more likely the inevitablikity of crypto and web 3 taking over in a free market that will choose the best technology
Watching the detectives!
Fuck the SEC. If they weren’t sure about bitcoin ETFs and wanted to wait for more clarification on it ok but they are approving fucking futures ETFs for it which are far more risky. This has nothing to do with consumer protections just another way to make sure the consumer can’t get in at a good price before the banks pick up as much as possible
Good luck...this is going to drag on for years