彭博分析师：不认为Suitcoiner或将威胁比特币结构

2025-05-02 11:51

彭博高级ETF分析师Eric Balchunas在X平台发文表示，华尔街金融行业从业者传出一个新词“Suitcoiners”，这个词来自于“Real Suits”，用来形容所有ETF、政府和机构买家。有人担心如果Suitcoiner们合谋，未来可能会威胁到比特币的结构，但其不认为这种情况会发生，因为股票投票也曾有过类似的未实现的担忧，但无论如何，这确实是一种恐惧。 (PANews)

24시간 플래시

오늘 2025-05-31

18:57

The net outflow of major single orders is 106 million yuan, and BTC is under significant short-term pressure

18:06

TAO abnormal, up 5.68% in 24H

17:46

Bitcoin Cash Rebounds 6.4% as Bulls Defend Key Support Zone

16:46

Brazilian Fintech Firm Méliuz Plans $78M Equity Offering to Buy Bitcoin, Shares Plunge

16:46

Here’s an image of what that letter actually says. (Keep in mind I am not a lawyer but I sometimes pretend to understand this stuff and will do my best) Essentially, the SEC seems to be saying that the clever legal and regulatory moves used to wedge this thing through have actually made it so that the fund doesn’t qualify under rule 6c-11. Rule 6c-11 is commonly known as “The ETF Rule”. It’s what makes 1940 Act funds (like the one filed here and other futures products) not have to go through that long drawn out 19b-4 process with deadlines and delays that you’re used to hearing about with regards to spot crypto products in the US. (The rule does more than that but this is the relevant part for now) SEC seems to be saying/arguing that these products likely don’t qualify for 6c-11 and therefore cannot list as structured.