5 ms·
Interesting. If accepted, I am tempted to buy a few shares and see what falls out over time.
by pnathan 12y ago
Interesting. If accepted, I am tempted to buy a few shares and see what falls out over time.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- primitivesuave 12y agoAccording to the filing, you would have to buy them in sets of 50,000.
- minimax 12y agoThat is only for "Authorized Participants" converting between bitcoin and shares in the ETF. It's the so called "creation and redemption" process and virtually all ETFs use a similar scheme. If the shares trade publicly you will be able to buy them one at a time if you want.
- nostromo 12y agoWhy not buy bitcoin directly? I get gold trusts, like GLD -- transporting and storing and selling gold is a pain. But it's easy to buy and store Bitcoin using a service like CoinBase. Not to mention the fact that you'll be paying management fees. I suppose if you wanted to put bitcoin in your IRA this would be helpful.
- ssharp 12y agoI trust my money in E*Trade, Fidelity, etc. far more than I trust it in any BitCoin wallet service.
- nostromo 12y agoYour broker will not protect you from buying a bad asset. The real question is if you trust the trust and its management. In other words: do you trust the Winklevosses?
- 7Figures2Commas 12y agoPlease read the prospectus: > Bitcoins held by the Trust are not subject to FDIC or SIPC protections. > The Trust is not a banking institution or otherwise a member of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) or Securities Investor Protection Corporation (“SIPC”) and, therefore, deposits held with or assets held by the Trust are not subject to the protections enjoyed by depositors with FDIC or SIPC member institutions. The undivided interests in the Trust’s bitcoins represented by Shares in the Trust are not insured. Also see "Risk Factors Related to the Regulation of the Trust and the Shares." The protections you apparently think you have don't exist.
- ssharp 12y agoI'm not going anywhere near this, just like I'm not going anywhere near any BitCoin wallet service. I realize the underlying assets are subject to some of the same risks as owning BitCoins themselves. The person who said do you trust the Winklevoss's more than the wallet service is on the money.
- ingler 12y agoI honestly don't understand using a service to store bitcoins when a paper wallet using keypairs with offline-generated addresses is so readily available. One of the aspects of Bitcoin that gives it value is cutting out third parties for storage.
- TTPrograms 12y agoSo I would imagine you intend to buy and sell coin by hawking your paper wallet on the street corner?
- ingler 12y agoI'll import the keys into the reference client. Or I can create a transaction by hand and inject it into the network.
- gnaritas 12y ago> I honestly don't understand using a service to store bitcoins when a paper wallet using keypairs with offline-generated addresses is so readily available. I honestly don't understand using a bank to store dollars when using a wallet is so readily available. Do you not see the flaw in your thinking? People with large amounts of money don't want the responsibility of securing their own money themselves. Storing Bitcoin's despite what people may say, is not trivial for the average person.
- ingler 12y agoI see no flaw in my thinking. I'm not the average person. Perhaps people should get up to speed before using Bitcoin unless they want to lose their money. Storing btc with a third party is a great way to lose them.
- CamperBob2 12y agoThe whole concept isn't ready for prime time. In my case, I lost a (fortunately) small hoard of BTC when I made the grievous error of backing up my wallet.dat file to a Synology NAS that was also using an open port to run my security camera server. "Use Linux! Windoze is insecure!" they said. Right.
- aqme28 12y agoBuying (and holding) through CoinBase is no more direct than buying and holding through their ETF. (Though if you buy through CoinBase and then store the coins in your own wallet, that's different)
- pnathan 12y ago> Why not buy bitcoin directly? MtGox is the chief example of a litany of skeezy & sketchy schemes associated with that could be, charitably, called badly done. Less charitable intepretations might be, "cons", or "fraud". Lots of that has shaken out, but the BTC community is rife with bad thinking. I feel far more comfortable throwing a $100 payment at my stockbroker account for an ETF, knowing that several layers of reliable cutouts stand between my bank account and some seriously dodgy businesses. And, frankly, I don't particularly feel like going through the dedicated work to secure & backup a bitcoin wallet, and I really don't feel like outsourcing that to a company which isn't already reputable and respected for being secure. The actual value of the underlying assets may, of course, turn into dust and dreams like so many other assets - that's as risky as all get out, and COIN has a lot of direct risks - it's a VERY speculative ETF. That's just the nature of things. And, too, I'm not going all in on COIN, I diversify my assets as a risk hedge. COIN would strictly be a sideline for amusements & maybe some profit. So the summation of this is, my fine trading account has a variety of services which serve to mitigate fraudulent behavior, and I will mitigate my risk vs. fraud by paying the trading fees & ETF fees, rather than assuming that risk directly on my systems.
- minimax 12y agoWhat will definitely fall out is whatever fees the Winklevoss brothers decide to pay themselves. We don't know what those fees are though, because they haven't said. You can ctrl-f around in the S-1 for "sponsor's fee" and note that it's left blank in the filing.
- unreal37 12y agoAccording to the filing, they have a 50,000 share minimum, which works out to $1 million at IPO price. Going to buy a few of those $1 million lots on a whim?