Yea and the inverse ETF’s seem to be high also. But look at GBTC they are still sitting at 1.5 percent, because they say they are experts on Crypto they can charge more. Those people have to be nuts paying that now.
Andy
1 Like
Per their site, that is not quite correct:
For a six-month period commencing on the day the Shares are initially listed on the Exchange, the Sponsor has agreed to waive the entire Sponsor Fee on the first $1 billion of Trust assets. If the Trust’s net assets exceed $1 billion, the Sponsor’s Fee charged on assets over $1 billion will be 0.20%. All investors will incur the same Sponsor’s Fee which is the weighted average of those fee rates [so a little over 0.1% currently]. After July 11, 2024, the Sponsor’s Fee will be 0.20%.
Current trust assets are about $2.5 billion. Still not a terrible fee - but not entirely free.
1 Like
I was in on day one, I exchanged my GBTC shares for BITB shares. But thank you, I hadn’t realized they also had an AUM clause.
Andy
CONY is on track to pay over 100% annual dividend. 9 months since inception the total dividend is over $15 so I will reward the management with a 1% fee. I have been invested in CONY for 3 months and total dividends are approximately $6.72 and I am happy with those numbers. MSTY is very new so I’m not sure how they will pay out in the future, but the first 2 dividends have been good. I am currently watching this one and have no position yet. ULTY also starting out strong…doc
1 Like
We had Bitcoin 2024 conference over the weekend and Trump addressed the conference. He said all the right things the Bitcoin crowd wants to hear. Setting asides the politics of this, Democrats will have to abandon their anti-Bitcoin crusade and even reach out to this constituency. In other words, both parties are embracing Bitcoin.
This may very well be the inflation point. Just saying.
2 Likes
They already have: the Senate Majority leader and the former Speaker both are now on the BTC side of things. You have some holdouts, of course, but there is now an increasingly bipartisan tone everywhere. Maybe the time has come. It’s no longer the bitcoin bros in Silicon Valley who have been championing the “currency” that they want few regulations to oversee.
Somewhat surprising in some ways, but not in others.
Pete
What were ‘all the things the crowd wants to hear’?
JimA
No they don’t. The majority of private (those not owned by exchanges) Bitcoin wallets hold no Bitcoin. The majority of wallets with Bitcoin are inactive.
They want the government to use public money to pump their bags, which the candidates promised to do. This is normally called “corruption.”
3 Likes
Trump speech is available in Internet, listen to it. I am sure someone wrote that speech and probably trump doesn’t understand most of what he said, For ex: he said things like “stablecoin”.
Here is one moment that totally captures the mood of the crowd, Trump goes, “on day one I will fire Gary Gensler”, the whole conference is on its feet roaring… Even trump looks taken aback by the reaction, he gathered himself and read the room, which he is very good at, and re-iterated it.
1 Like
Pivoting from Biden helps, but the current administration position is so unpopular, you have over $250 M of crypto money is flowing into GOP coffers vs almost $0 for democrats. You have thousands of young men and women preaching Crypto, who are natural constituency of Democrats.
Very poor, uninformed take. The crypto-world is worried, angry about the regulation, and simply “anti-crypto” attitude of the administration rather than they want anyone’s money.
Ah, I see the advantage and attractiveness now - lack of accountability and avoidance of legal judgments.
Pete
2 Likes
Is that even possible? He doesn’t seem able to put a full sentence together; not sure if he ever has a cogent thought; not sure how anyone can listen to him for more than a minute or so without losing brain cells.
I’d say we should give Gensler everything he needs to regulate and supervise anything to do with crypto! And the sooner the better.
JimA
4 Likes
When you don’t like the policies, character of someone, it is very important not to under estimate. Also, just because you don’t like a person, that doesn’t mean everything he supports is wrong or you have to oppose them.
I like what FTC Chair Lina Khan does, but I also understand all VC’s, tech companies hate her. Startups’ could not get their exit, i.e., sell themselves to big tech companies, big tech is unable to do M&A, etc. Most likely in a new administration she will be gone. Between her and Gensler, I think Lina Khan’s work is for the benefit of the society. I am not so sure about Gensler.
2 Likes
Just speaking for myself, but when I hear about an “investment” that is unaccountable to anyone and totally unregulated by anybody, I definitely want to put all my money into it.
After all, what could possibly go wrong?
7 Likes
Kingran, Harris is already pivoting on that point. I think anything to do with Biden is old news now.
https://www.ft.com/content/1a4c5066-9cc0-4849-993b-06a28022ad66
I think that is a very tired and old argument. Now that there are Bitcoin etf’s, and soon to be Ethereum etf’s, all the old tired remarks about this being unregulated and unaccountable has been put to rest.
1 Like
It is already here… and I own it.
1 Like
Both candidates got big cheers when they promised public dollars to pump the bags. Very odd behavior from people who supposedly don’t want the government to pump their bags.
"Regulation by Enforcement” is shibboleth the crypto community uses to promote a sense of victimhood. The SEC’s crypto regulations are crystal clear. Crypto are securities. Therefore, if you want broker crypto, you need to follow existing securities laws. The disconnect is crypto kingpins don’t like the existing laws and they want new, special laws that only apply to them.
For example, the Winkelvii sold what effectively were crypto bonds to the general public, but without making the require disclosures to either the SEC or the public. The scheme worked something like this, the Winkelvie would accept crypto from customers and hold it for them, with the promise to pay a high rate of interest. Of course, they would extract an amazing fee for this service. The scheme worked great until they ran out of new investors, couldn’t pay the high interest rates anymore, and “lost” everyone’s money. The SEC sued them as a result.
The Winkelvii are now screaming bloody blue murder at how unfair this all is. They say there is no possible way they could have known than running a Ponzi scheme is illegal. Came out of the blue. SEC rules are totally unfair to legitimate Ponzi operators like themselves, they say.
Similarly Celsius Network CEO Mashinsky had a scheme where he paid amazing rates of interest on borrowed crypto. This caught the notice of the SEC as well of the regulators of several states who though he might be selling unregistered securities. He also screamed the need for “clarity” but for some reason, he was also unable to pay these amazing interest rates and also lost his costumers money. Again, I ask you, how could he have possibly known running a Ponzi scheme is illegal?
Along those lines, that nice Sam Bankman-Fried testified before Congress back in 2021 that FTX does so many wonderful things for its customers, and it would be even more wonderful if the SEC had different rules that make it easier for crytpo firms to run Ponzi schemes. Actually, he didn’t say that last part but that’s why he wanted new rules because the existing rules didn’t allow him to steal from his customers.
Nope. The old rules work fine. They are written the way they are to prevent the exact fraud and abuse that permeates the crypto industry. The “need for clarity” message would land a lot harder if the loudest voices weren’t all criminals.
4 Likes