So, here’s the scoop: Hester Peirce, a big shot over at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), spilled the beans on why they took forever to give the nod to a real-deal Bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF). According to her, it’s all been a bit of a waste of time.
In a recent chat with Natalie Brunell, one of the SEC’s top dogs, Peirce laid it out. She reckons the SEC needs to do some soul-searching and figure out where they went wrong in the approval process. It’s like she’s saying, “Hey, we’ve got standards, and if a product meets those, who cares if we’re not fans of what’s underneath?!”
Peirce is all about the magic of exchange-traded products, explaining how they give regular folks access to all sorts of assets, both fancy securities and not-so-fancy non-securities. And it’s all wrapped up in this securities vehicle, making it a breeze for people to diversify their portfolios. She even throws in a cool twist, suggesting that having assets in this wrapper might make it a walk in the park for many to deal with them.
Sure, she gets it – Bitcoin was the shiny new kid on the block, and the SEC needed some time to wrap its head around it. But here’s the real head-scratcher for her: instead of asking if the SEC has hugged Bitcoin tight enough, they should be focusing on how the darn product will trade. It’s like she’s saying, “Come on, folks, it’s just a case of being scared of what we don’t know.”
Just last week, after years of saying no, the SEC finally gave the green light to 11 spot Bitcoin ETFs. But get this – they were all about Bitcoin futures ETFs back in 2021. Talk about a plot twist!
