3 ms·
> that he would "short" it if he could This takes on a new meaning in light of GameStop's massive naked short selling, with buyers never really possessing hard
by BenoitP 6y ago
> that he would "short" it if he could
This takes on a new meaning in light of GameStop's massive naked short selling, with buyers never really possessing hard shares [1].
I'm not saying a short selling infrastructure can't be built to target Bitcoin. I'm saying that, unlike trading shares, you can physically own Bitcoin. You're not at the mercy of your broker only selling you an IOU instead of a share.
Point number 2: to actually build a Bitcoin short selling infrastructure, you're going to need first to acquire some amount of Bitcoin liquidity. You can't go fully naked. And this will drive Bitcoin price's further up.
[1] https://prospect.org/power/gamestop-mess-exposes-the-naked-short-selling-scam/ https://prospect.org/power/gamestop-mess-exposes-the-naked-s...
- TheCoelacanth 6y agoI don't think that's an inherent attribute of bitcoin, it's based entirely on what types of deals brokers and traders are willing to engage in. If you buy a stock and actually take possession of it instead of letting your broker hold onto it for you, then your shares can't be lent out. People generally don't do that because it makes it harder to buy and sell and there is usually not a realistic chance of your share being lent out actually hurting you. If you buy bitcoin and let a broker hold onto it for you, then they could lend it out. Off-chain transactions like this are becoming increasingly popular as people look to avoid increasing transaction fees.