July 24, 2018
The abundance of comments submitted on subject of this ETF speaks clearly: there is a mass of unsophisticated retail investors---most with no previous investing experience---looking to get rich quick or make back losses from the Bitcoin market plunge over the last half year. And of course the many savvy retail and institutional investors more than happy to take advantage of them.
For all the comments urging the importance of the United States being at forefront of blockchain or distributed ledger technology and innovation by allowing a Bitcoin ETF, few if any are able to explain why it is hinged on expansion on the wholly speculative nature of this asset class. Actual economic growth occurs through jobs, services and goods from innovative companies in this space not ZERO-SUM speculation. Particularly as the advantage touted by this ETF is the 'safe' holding of Bitcoin. In other words something not meant to be used as a currency by consumers but rather to be hoarded via a custodian. The growth of the internet economy did not occur because investors were able to gamble on an ETF of domain name registration squatting (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybersquatting).
Even so it is telling that the mention-able examples of companies succeeding in this sector are mining equipment manufacturers (https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/23/secretive-chinese-bitcoin-mining-company-may-have-made-as-much-money-as-nvidia-last-year.html) and online cryptocurrency exchanges (https://www.businessinsider.com/binance-cryptocurrency-exchange-profit-prediction-2018-7). In other words, casinos are the biggest profit-makers in the market of gamblers.
In summation a SEC approval of this ETF should not be ambiguous in its one true purpose: opening a door to a new class of online gambling for the masses.