<\/p>\n The VanEck x SolidX \u00a0Bitcoin ETF was proposed by VanEck<\/a>–an investment management company–and SolidX<\/a>–a software company that develops blockchain technologies. Unlike a number of ETF\u2019s that have been proposed in the past that merely track Bitcoin, the VanEck x SolidX ETF would physically back their fund, meaning they would hold the underlying asset–Bitcoin. The price of each share would be based on an index created by <\/span>MVIS<\/span><\/a>, a subsidiary of VanEck, and each share would represent 25 BTC. The ETF was filed on June 5, 2018, but was not published for comments in the <\/span>Federal\u00a0Register by the SEC until July 2nd<\/span><\/a>. <\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Companies have been trying to get a Bitcoin ETF on the market for quite some time now, but so far, each ETF that has been filed has been denied by the SEC. An ETF would provide investors with more protections when it comes to putting their money and trust into cryptocurrency. Some are hopeful that the VanECk ETF has the best chance of getting approved–compared to the other ETF\u2019s we have seen–because it is geared toward institutional investors. <\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n But so far, things have not been looking too good for the VanEck x SolidX ETF,<\/span> it has recently received its second delay on a final decision from the SEC<\/span><\/a>, and it is likely to be delayed once more. <\/span><\/p>\n The process<\/b><\/p>\n Some people believe that the SEC will be giving a final decision on the VanEck x SolidX ETF on December 18th–the new date for final decision after the September 20th postponement was announced, but its more than likely that the SEC is going to use their final delay and extend the final decision date by 60 days on or before December 18th. \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n The SEC is allowed to delay an ETF decision up to three times. Once an ETF is filed in the Federal Register, the SEC is supposed to announce their decision within 45 days. However, on or before the 45th day, they are allowed to extend the decision date by 45 more days (first delay) if they believe that a longer period of time is appropriate to make a decision. <\/span>We saw this happen on August 7th<\/span><\/a>–which is 41 days after the ETF was published in the federal register–when the SEC published a notice saying they are delaying the decision by 45 more days.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u201cAccordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,[<\/span><\/i>6<\/span><\/i><\/a>]designates September 30, 2018, as the date by which the Commission shall either approve or disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove, the proposed rule change (File No. SR-CboeBZX-2018-040)\u201d<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n <\/p>\n And on, or before, the first 45 day postponement period ends, the SEC can extend the decision date by 90 days (second delay) to address grounds for disapproval– <\/span>which is what we saw happen on September 20th<\/span><\/a>–exactly 45 days after August 7th–when the SEC announced their second delay. <\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n That being said, the next deadline for the decision, excluding weekends and holidays that fall in between, would be December 18th. Some are hopeful that the SEC will make a final approval or denial decision that day; however, it would not be surprising if we saw the SEC exercise the last postponement they can make. After 180 days from filing, the SEC is allowed to delay the decision by 60 more days (third delay) if they feel that a longer review period is necessary, making the entire process from filing to the final decision a 240-day affair. <\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n So why the delays?<\/b><\/p>\n In the past, every Bitcoin \u00a0ETF that has been proposed has been denied. The previous Bitcoin ETFs were denied over concerns of fraud and manipulation in the market for cryptocurrencies. For example, here is what the SEC had to say when they rejected the <\/span>ProShares Bitcoin ETF and the ProShares Short Bitcoin ETF<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u201cin particular, \u00a0the requirement that a national securities exchange\u2019s rules be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices.10 Among other things, the Exchange has offered no record evidence to demonstrate that bitcoin futures markets are \u201cmarkets of significant size.\u201d That failure is critical because, as explained below, the Exchange has failed to establish that other means to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices will be sufficient, and therefore surveillance-sharing with a regulated market of significant size related to bitcoin is necessary to satisfy the statutory requirement that the Exchange\u2019s rules be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices\u201d <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n <\/p>\n And to a degree, I believe this is true. There are times when you see the market spike or drop and then return to its original valuation about an hour or two later.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n![\"VanEck](\"https:\/\/timestampmag.com\/new\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/10\/VanEck.png\")
<\/a>\u00a0![\"SolidX](\"https:\/\/timestampmag.com\/new\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/10\/SolidX.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n
![\"Coinbase](\"https:\/\/timestampmag.com\/new\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/10\/sep-9-pd-300x147.jpg\")
<\/a>