More approved use means more standard financial industry products using BTC, means more overall volume/value in BTC, means higher price. Of course people holding BTC will like that.
Given that the original Whitepaper is titled: "A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System" and a news article describing the 2009 bank bailout is literally baked into the very first block people celebrating slow morphing of Bitcoin into a traditional finance product is at least a little bit funny. Instead of a hedge crypto is now just effectively a correlate of the financial markets.
Conversely, traditional finance making products based on an asset which some of the most radical anarchocapitalists hold market-moving amounts of, bodes well.
Does it? Traditional finance is no stranger to extremely speculative assets, the difference is just when those assets go to zero for the banks it's a tiny fraction of their portfolio, for all the anarcho online enthusiasts it's usually their savings. Reminds me of the Gamestop fiasco one or two years ago.
Yes, if in your mind a summer of Gamestop meme trading equals a technology with 40 years of research from the top applied cryptographers, 10 years of production testing, and an asset with thin markets and extremely asymmetric holdings.
The ability to easily reduce crypto to some hot take and equivalence is why otherwise quite smart people keep missing the space for the last decade.
A lot of people are expecting to get rich off Bitcoin. They still think it's a ticket to financial freedom even though returns since late 2017 have been mediocre. Relative to volatility, they would be better off with 3x tech etfs like TQQQ or TECL, which have more upside and less risk compared to Bitcoin for the same amount of volatility.
The TQQQ ETF hasn't experienced a downturn as severe as the 2000 crash. Market crashes recur; it's unrealistic to expect a perpetual bull market. In a major crash, TQQQ could plummet by 99.9%, turning $1 million into $1,000. Being swap-based and not replicated, TQQQ could potentially drop to near zero and face delisting, as seen with some 3x leveraged ETFs before.
It’s not irrational: an ETF would make it a lot easier to buy Bitcoin, which would increase demand. It’s funny though, because if Bitcoin would work as well as advertised, a traditional exchange shouldn’t offer this kind of advantage.
"Currently, Fidelity Crypto does not support borrowing against assets, leverage, or margin trading. You can only transfer, and use collected and settled available cash, as well as processed EFT deposits, to trade within your Fidelity Crypto account"
Reminds me a bit of how whenever a stock starts getting rumors of being included in an index there are HF guys bidding it up to dump on the index ETFs.
"Oh glorious SEC, once thou bestowest thine blessing, Crypto shall rise a thousandfold! Glory to Bitcoin!"