In a bold move, Better Markets, a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting the public interest in financial markets, has launched a scathing critique of the recent approval of Spot Spot Ethereum ETFs. It criticized the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for approving the Ethereum ETFs. Better Markets’ Director of Securities Policy, Benjamin Schiffrin, minced no words in his condemnation.
Better Markets Criticizes The Approval Of Ethereum ETFs
Schiffrin labeled the move as a “historic mistake” that would only exacerbate the risks faced by investors in the volatile crypto industry. Moreover, Schiffrin’s statement comes hot on the heels of the SEC’s approval of proposed rule changes allowing national securities exchanges to list and trade shares in Spot Ether ETPs.
The decision has raised significant concerns within the financial community. The reason for such concerns lies in the recent indictments and convictions related to fraudulent activities in the crypto space. “Today the SEC doubled down on its historic mistake of approving spot bitcoin ETPs,” Schiffrin lamented.
In addition, he highlighted the dangers posed by investing in assets like ETH, the native currency of the Ethereum network. Moreover, he pointed to recent cases as evidence of the inherent risks associated with Spot Ethereum ETFs. He spotlighted the indictment of two brothers for exploiting the integrity of the Ethereum blockchain to fraudulently obtain millions of dollars in cryptocurrency.
“In our original and supplemental comment letters, we highlighted the reasons why the proposed rule changes to list and trade shares in spot ether ETPs should have been rejected,” Schiffrin explained. He emphasized the volatility of Ether as an asset and the vulnerabilities of the Ethereum network to fraud and manipulation. Furthermore, he warned that the approval of Spot Ether ETPs would only serve to endanger retail investors and threaten the broader financial system.
Also Read: Top 4 ETH-Based Meme Coins That Could Soar with an Ethereum ETF
Statement Against Sam Bankman-Fried & CZ
Furthermore, the involvement of prominent figures like Sam Bankman-Fried, founder of FTX, and Changpeng Zhao (CZ), founder of Binance, further underscores the concerns raised by Better Markets. Both individuals have faced legal troubles in recent months. Bankman-Fried was convicted of stealing billions of dollars and CZ pleading guilty to money laundering.
According to the court rulings, Bankman-Fried got 64 months in prison. Whilst, Binance’s CZ got 4 months in prison, however, it’s unclear if he has started serving the sentence. Better Markets believes that Ethereum ETFs could pose similar threats to the financial system as seen in the above-mentioned cases.
However, Better Markets has attracted backlash for this statement. Nate Geraci, the host of ETF Prime, highlighted the unprecedented shift in the SEC and Biden administration’s stance on crypto. He noted that Better Markets might not be aware of the abrupt shift. In a sarcastic tone, Geraci stated, “Better Markets apparently didn’t get the memo from DC to shift stance on crypto.”
Also Read: Bitcoin Price Forecast: $80,000 Per BTC Looms As Spot Ethereum ETFs Launch?
The post Ethereum ETF To Mirror Damage Caused By Sam Bankman-Fried & CZ: Better Markets appeared first on CoinGape.
Earn more PRC tokens by sharing this post. Copy and paste the URL below and share to friends, when they click and visit Parrot Coin website you earn: https://parrotcoin.net0
PRC Comment Policy
Your comments MUST BE constructive with vivid and clear suggestion relating to the post.
Your comments MUST NOT be less than 5 words.
Do NOT in any way copy/duplicate or transmit another members comment and paste to earn. Members who indulge themselves copying and duplicating comments, their earnings would be wiped out totally as a warning and Account deactivated if the user continue the act.
Parrot Coin does not pay for exclamatory comments Such as hahaha, nice one, wow, congrats, lmao, lol, etc are strictly forbidden and disallowed. Kindly adhere to this rule.
Constructive REPLY to comments is allowed