@brianmctavish@gherkinit@Dr_Gingerballs@Taylor72350938@Gafgarian@DorkMtb Sure, if they keep the ETF liabilities in the CNS pipeline and stack FTDs they can pile up these liabilities and flood Coinbase with them all at once who then needs to process this demand shock causing a spike in volatility. Rinse and repeat for perpetual cycles to profit from.
@Dr_Gingerballs The exchange hedging their exposure could then theoretically also be done via BTC futures which are also all cash settled which keeps the whole thing entirely off-chain and just turns it in to a futures ETF like BITO but with extra steps no?
1/ Why 2030?
Two years ago I said you are "insufficiently bullish" about NFTs, which is of course true.
Also, there was a "2030" in the title.
The thread explained a lot of things, but not "why 2030?"
Today, I will explain.
https://t.co/T29HLeEnR2
@Andrew_J_Howard He laid it on a little thick here but the average CNBC viewer will eat it up. He is clearly not this dumb and he knows exactly what he's doing here.
@redchessqueen99 Funny, it describes pretty much exactly how big boi Citadel bailed out smol boi Melvin by abusing it's massive amount of capital/margin and every privilege/exemption known to man. Wouldn't work for FTX though, they are smol boi Citadel needs the biggest of bois to make this work
@laxmi108_cp@P_MackD@SenSanders@jonstewart@GaryGensler @LisaBraganca @SenWarren@SenFinance Retail participation in the market has been on the rise for the last years due to RH type brokers has lead to lots of buying of risky options and market makers gladly sell them because it makes them a LOT of money
@Taylor72350938 So the massive profits from securities lending is leading fund managers to act seemingly contrary to the best interest of their long holdings, but also perhaps to not recall shares in case of a split? Taking on risk of delivery in lieu of guaranteed income from lending?