Quote from: BTCETFInvestor on September 11, 2025, 04:45:47 PM

Quote from: yixichloro2xx on September 11, 2025, 04:39:08 PM

Quote from: BTCETFInvestor on September 11, 2025, 04:31:12 PM

Acquired Bitcoin, whether held directly by individuals with self-custody, or held by Blackrock or Fidelity to cover their ETFs takes those Bitcoins out of the available supply which increases Bitcoin scarcity. The end result is the same, fewer coins available - and that makes the price of BTC go higher.

BTW, Fidelity self-custodies their Bitcoin in-house unlike Blackrock, who uses both Coinbase and Anchorage as custodians.

nice one , whether it is retail self custody or institutions like BlackRock and Fidelity buying for their ETFs, the effect is the same,those coins leave the open market and reduce circulating supply. The custody setup may differ, with Fidelity running theirs in house and BlackRock using Coinbase and Anchorage, but either way the result is coins being locked up for the long term.

What this really shows is that demand for Bitcoin is flowing from both sides. Retail holders remove supply through self custody, while institutions do it through ETFs that appeal to traditional investors. Combine that with lost coins and long term holders, and the float keeps shrinking year after year. Instead of weakening the case for direct ownership, institutional accumulation makes it stronger, because scarcity only increases.

Bingo! You got it - spot on! Grin

Additionally, with greatly increasing adoption in all areas, including retail investors, countries' reserves, private companies, etc., this will only continue to move the price higher and higher in the future.

Bitcoin will climb quickly much higher in price just like the stocks of Apple (AAPL) and Amazon (AMZN) for example have done once the public and financial institutions/firms see the increased demand for BTC and people adding spot Bitcoin ETFs in their brokerage accounts.

For example, I bought both AAPL and AMZN at $5 about 15 years ago - now they are both 46X higher at $230 with financial institutions and retail investors buying up more and more shares all the time.

I would not bet against BTC, now at ~$115k, increasing 46X (like AAPL & AMZN has done) over the coming 15 years, which would be $5 million per BTC in 2040. This $5 million price for Bitcoin is actually what a lot of experts have predicted it will be in 15 years in 2040...
And with me being an experienced 'investor' and not a trader, I still own a lot of shares of AAPL and AMZN!

Bitcoin is not a stock, yet surely there are several kinds of derivative products that have turned bitcoin into something like a stock, and so bitcoin is not the same as those other stocks, whether referring to Apple or Amazon or whatever other stocks that you might own.

There are also legal requirements that Blackrock, Fidelity and the other Bitcoin ETF providers have to hold bitcoin and/or some other ways of backing up the shares that they issue, yet sometimes companies engaged in shenanigans to manipulate the market, and surely they could be running some risks to attempt to manipulate bitcoin beyond certain levels in which they might not have the BTC to back up the shares that their various clients are purchasing.

Ultimately this thread is about bitcoin rather than derivative products, even if supposedly they have enough bitcoin to cover all of their bitcoin liabilities, this is likely not the place to be trying to argue about the pros and cons of inferior products.. even though sure Larry Fink and his team are out marketing bitcoin and they seem to be on the side of bitcoin in order to sell their derivative products, and surely there are some folks (such as institutions, governments and/or individuals who are holding some kind of retirement account) who are unwilling or unable to directly buy bitcoin, so they are able to buy derivative products such as BTC ETFs.

Getting into too much discussion of BTC ETFs and/or comparing them to bitcoin might be deserving of another thread, to the extent that threads already exist related to such topics.

Even though various ETFs provide demand on the BTC price, another layer of complication is included regarding the shares that are issued and the process behind it and how they are funded, so it might not always be clear if Blackrock or any of the other ETF providers are not sometimes floating the fulfillment of the BTC that are supposedly to back their ETFs, and also the legal owner of the BTC would be Blackrock and/or their custodian rather than the BTC ETF shareholder.

Quote from: BTCETFInvestor on September 11, 2025, 06:43:59 PM

Quote from: BTCETFInvestor on September 11, 2025, 04:45:47 PM

[edited out]

What's also nice is people can buy just 1 share of spot Bitcoin ETFs (IBIT or FBTC), or even a fractional share and add more on a weekly or monthly basis if they desire.

For example, one share of Fidelity's FTBC today is about $100 which represents about 0.01 or $1,150 worth of 1 BTC which is currently about $115,000 per coin. Some brokerages like Fidelity even allows fractional shares so a ½ (.5) share of FBTC can be bought for just $50.

I really like the fact that spot Bitcoin ETFs will track the price of Bitcoin, so when Bitcoin goes up X % the ETF will parallel track that change in Bitcoin's price. This direct correlation is perfect for investors that want to take advantage of Bitcoin's expected future price without the hassle of direct Bitcoin ownership and the self-custody.

Even if a bitcoin ETF might work for some folks, including the employment of a DCA strategy, owning a Bitcoin ETF is not necessarily perfect, and it is also not on topic to be pumping that shitcoin on this thread.

This thread is about bitcoin, and if you provide a link to some other thread, then no problem providing that here.. but we should not be getting into the weeds of comparing and/or contrasting the owning of bitcoin to various derivative products (including BTC ETF products) in this thread.

Quote from: Tonimez on September 11, 2025, 10:56:16 PM

Quote from: Finebone on September 11, 2025, 09:59:15 PM

Quote from: Proty link=topic=5132720.msg65795633#msg65795633 [Edited out

It makes no sense for a bitcoin investor to invest only 5 - 10% of his discretionary income because it's definitely going to take him or her quite a lot of time or years to accumulate something tangible that can impact his financial status.
I know that most people will argue that 5-10% of some investors discretionary income is very huge, yes it might be very huge to some, but to that person, it's just too small because that's his level. The ideal figure we should be talking about is like 50-60% of your discretionary income or more, that way you can be able to acquire a lot of unit of Bitcoin faster than just 5-10% that is just too small to the investor in question base in his level.

5-10% of an investor's discretionary income is definitely too small for bitcoin investment no matter the level of the investor. When an investor earns large income, his investments per DCA or his DCA allocation should be proportional to his income. It would not be a good match to compare an investor who earns $1000 monthly with another investor who earns $200 per month because they are quite on a different broader income level. So also, it would be an unwise comparison if such investors with income of $1000 to stay too low to compare himself with another investor with $200 monthly.

Even though responsibilities may differ which could also make someone who earns large to live poorer than a lower income earner, 5% of a person's discretionary income is already even less than 1% of your total income and this is poor. For a person that earns $1000 monthly with a discretionary income of $300 after his basic responsibilities, if he invests only 5% of his discretionary income which is $15, it would be equivalent to investing just 1.5% of your income per month. This would take you about 67 months to invest your one month salary into bitcoin at least 5 years and 6 months to invest just one month salary in bitcoin.

If such person remains in active service for 20 years after joining the bitcoin investment, it would mean he has only invested less than his 4 months salary. This amount can not serve it's retirement purpose and is very negligible. It does not show good financial management system. So taking your investments to at least 50% of your Discretionary income would be much better for the future. In as much as everyone has right to do whatever pleases him with his money, it won't be out of place retracing your steps and being more strategic and intentional and your accumulation target and focusing on it within the shortest of time. However, also remember that it is wiser to plan for your retirement early enough in other not to retire into poverty.

5% to 10% is much better than 0%.

People have to figure out what they are ready, willing and able to invest into bitcoin.

Of course, I personally recommend beginners consider anywhere between 5% and 25%, yet of course, they have to figure out if they have discretionary income and that they are able to invest 4-10 years or longer too.. even though in the very beginning they might not know if they are going to be ready, willing and able to commit to invest into bitcoin for 4-10 years or longer. So they haver to work out for themselves the level of their aggressiveness based on their cashflow situation and likely based on their 9 individual factors.