Crypto News: Markets are now anxiously awaiting the official announcement of SEC approval of spot Bitcoin ETFs, especially for BlackRock.
In fact, Blackrock itself has explained the reasons why the SEC should approve specifically its request to issue an ETF also on spot ETH, and these reasons also apply to its request regarding an ETF on spot BTC.
Except that approval of the latter is expected in early January, while spot ETH ETFs will likely take months more.
Crypto News: Reasons to “Yes” to BlackRock’s Spot Bitcoin ETF
BlackRock is a sponsor of this initiative, so much so that the official name of the derivative is iShares Ethereum Trust. Nasdaq Stock Market LLC will operationally market the shares of the ETF.
He just brought up this last one declaration to the SEC stating that approval of the spot ETH ETF would be a “major victory for the protection of US investors” in the crypto sector.
Rather, they specified that they believe the lack of a similar derivative product exposes US investors’ assets to significant risk, as they would thus be forced to find alternative exposure through generally riskier products.
They probably refer to crypto exchanges, which, as the case of FTX shows, are significantly more at risk.
It should be noted that this reasoning also implies that there is a way in the US market for US investors to invest in cryptocurrencies, but only by using high-risk products.
However, we must not forget that ETFs already exist, even if they are based on futures contracts and not on the real basis (ETH).
Furthermore, they also state that the ETH futures market of the CME (Chicago Stock Exchange) represents a regulated market of significant size, and therefore BlackRock’s proposal should be approved.
Previous
Nasdaq also implicitly cites a recent ruling condemning the SEC for refusing to grant a similar request for Grayscale on BTC.
In fact, the agency has always justified its strange stance of approving ETH on crypto futures but not on spot futures by citing legal tangles regarding the differences between the two underlying instruments.
Nasdaq instead states that these differences are not significant in the context of ETH.
The judge who ruled in Grayscale’s favor pointed out that the SEC itself had failed to credibly explain why it considered these differences significant, so he condemned the agency’s conduct.
With the just-presented document, Nasdaq seems to be twisting a knife into the wound, almost as if it wants to order the SEC not to forget that sentence. At this point, it is conceivable that in the event of further failure, Nasdaq and BlackRock could also sue the SEC.
Furthermore, in the document, Nasdaq also specifically adds that the Commission’s approval of ETFs on ETH futures means that it will also have to approve ETPs on spot ETH.
All against the SEC
Now it seems everyone is against the SEC.
The only ones who persist in wanting to support this approach are some politicians who are averse to cryptocurrencies, but who may not have the power to block the approval of spot ETFs.
In the face of a court ruling openly confirming that the SEC erred in not granting Grayscale’s request, the SEC’s position seems objectively unsustainable.
Only political propaganda, which is certainly not composed of truth, can continue to support an objectively wrong position, under the current laws of the United States.
To this, however, it must be added that in the USA the political propaganda campaign has already started ahead of next year’s presidential elections, so much of what American politicians are saying at the moment is just pure propaganda, without any comparison to reality.
According to several experts, the chances of the SEC approving BlackRock’s request would be higher than 90% and even 95%. On the other hand, the company has an average approval rate of over 99% for these requests.
