如何看待以太坊ETF的后市影响:合规大棒下迎来“山寨狂舞”

币界网Published on 2024-05-28Last updated on 2024-08-13

币界网报道:

如何看待以太坊ETF被通过之后的后市行业发展变局?先说结论:在我看来,市场会迎来较长时间的“山寨”季,牛市Bull Run正当时,只是过程不会那么美好。Why?接下来,说说我的个人观察:

1.比特币ETF通过之后的市场反响并没有有如预期般宏大,大家预想中的狂暴大疯牛并没有如期而至,但明显比特币的波动率降低了,市场承接能力在变强,背后的华尔街神秘力量成了大家对比特币稳定下来的“拖底‘保障。

因为,BTC纯资产属性,背后缺乏一个完整的生态支撑,BTC的二级市场预期和大家正在Build的一级市场似乎脱节了,短期看BTC对市场的“增益”效果,无法延展到一级价投市场,尤其是对主流以太坊的乐高生态市场,关联性就更弱了。

然而,以太坊ETF的通过就大为不同了?一方面,ETH的通缩直接会影响一级市场的活跃度,以太坊价格增长,layer2 Gas低的优势会凸显会间接带动layer2市场的发展,以太坊流通量减少,则会加剧Restaking和AVS生息赛道的内卷而带动价值增长,以太坊掌握在增量基金手里,被用来投资和支持合规头部DeFi项目等等。

如果这样举例觉得牵强,但其实只需明白,以太坊今天的价值就背后这个庞大的一级Build市场一点点催生的,反之,ETH自身资产价格和流通受众面,也会给行业生态带来源源不断的用户、资金以及人才资源等等。这才是以太坊ETF相对更会推动“山寨季”到来的根本原因。

2.这里所说的“山寨”币,我更想指代的是一些有VC支持、有团队Build、Token没发行时得不到市场高度重视,Token发行后币价拉胯得不到价值支撑的“主流币”。简单而言,以太坊ETF的通过,能吸引主流基金涌入以太坊构建起来的庞大生态内,驱动价值币的持续增长。(能不能破除价值币不如MeMe币的魔咒在此一举了。

不过,理想很美好,要想让主流基金流入生态,带动web3的创业生态并不容易。美国众议员通过的《21世纪金融创新与科技法案》简称 FIT21的通过,信息含量很大,该法案明确提出要提供关键的消费者保护并促进美国数字资产生态系统的创新。浅浅解读一下:

1、CFTC美国商品期货交易委员会有了更大的监管权力,数字虚拟资产在“商品‘属性下监管会更灵活自由,这是政策端场长期“稳定”少变数的基础;

2、“合规”会成为Crypto数字生态发展的主旋律,包括对发行资产的流程和标准规范等制度体系建设,这意味着虚拟资产生态会分为两个极端:

迎合合规的会逐步在KYC、反洗钱等关键问题上找到解决方案,会直接得到ETF增益Buff,不迎合合规的会被加大力度制裁和打击,会逐渐归于小众市场(比如:Tornado);还记得,21年那波机构涌入年,我们就定义市场为合规元年了,然而FTX、Luna事件的意外发生让这一夙愿被延迟。ETF的通过,“合规”问题终究还是得面对。

3、美国ZF或者财阀会在稳定币、交易所、数字资产托管机构、支付平台等关键领域强势“干涉”,短期直接做比如直接法稳定币的概率较低,但不排除其间接通过发牌照等方式做幕后控盘手。

3.若以上猜想被言中,可以预见:

短期Crypto二级市场会两级分化,一些幕后暗庄会在一系列规范法案出台前加大力度炒作,MeMe币和部分主流币会有高波动率,山寨会狂舞;

中期看,一些头部DeFi、稳定币以及交易所等会更加加大合规力度,合规导向好的价值标的会有不错的市场表现,反之则截然相反,会逐渐失去价值支撑;

长期看,Crypto政治色彩会带动加密市场一点点迎合web2市场的品味偏好,这也许会让一部分秉承高度去中心化的原教旨主义失望,但期待政策带利好,和被政策按地上摩擦本就是把双刃剑。

web3 native也不是打着去中心化名义诈骗洗钱的保护伞,在合规大棒下,人群社区分化,产品层级化是大势所趋,Crypto一些很复杂的技术和协议,监管也很难左右,但是市场只会站队最主流的那条发展路线。(选择权其实在市场。

总之,或是投机主义者的最后狂欢,或是监管利剑的一点点的威压,或者高波动性被约束后的投机人群的流失等等。每个人心目中都有自己的Crypto发展愿景。整体而言,政治牵引下的Crypto市场一定不再维系当初纯粹”去中心化“的梦想,但却能让多年来混序发展的Crypto市场拥有剔除糟粕,让主流价值币有发光发亮的可能。

Trending Cryptos

Related Reads

The Full Story of How Crypto Unicorn Blockstream Is Mired in Serious Fraud Allegations

This article details serious allegations of fraud against Bitcoin infrastructure company Blockstream, founded by Bitcoin pioneer Adam Back. In June 2024, investigative account NatInfoSec published a report accusing Blockstream's mining note (BMN) program of potentially operating a multi-billion dollar scheme with Ponzi-like characteristics. The core allegations focus on Blockstream Mining Notes (BMNs), which offer investors fixed annual yields up to approximately 20% from Bitcoin mining. NatInfoSec's investigation raises several key issues: 1. **Suspicious Hashrate & Payout Capacity**: The analysis suggests Blockstream would need 20-45 EH/s of mining power to cover its BMN obligations, but its public dashboard shows only around 15 EH/s. Furthermore, no verifiable public evidence (e.g., grid connection records, import data) was found to support the massive mining operation required. 2. **Questionable Payout Source**: The BMN contract allows Blockstream to use Bitcoin from *any source* (Substitute Performance BTC) to fulfill investor payouts, raising concerns that payouts may not come from actual mining revenue. 3. **High-Risk, Fixed Returns**: Offering ~20% fixed yields in the volatile, cyclical Bitcoin mining industry is viewed as highly unusual and requires clear explanation. 4. **Undisclosed Criminal Record of Key Figure**: Christopher William Cook, a key figure in Blockstream's mining operations and CEO of spin-off Exacore, was found to have a federal felony conviction for mail fraud in 2008, a fact not disclosed in BMN offering documents. His background was also allegedly embellished. 5. **Potential Contagion to BSTR SPAC**: Questions were raised about whether these liabilities and Cook's record should have been disclosed in the SEC filings for Bitcoin Standard Treasury Company (BSTR), a separate Adam Back-associated firm planning a SPAC merger. The crypto community is divided. BitMEX Research validated Cook's criminal record and expressed concern over the high yields but found other evidence lacking or misleading, noting the legal separation between BMN, Blockstream, and BSTR. Blockstream defenders, like Samson Mow, argue the mining is real. Critics, however, emphasize the lack of independent, verifiable proof of the mining operation's scale and the true source of investor payouts. The article concludes that BMN remains shrouded in key unanswered questions regarding its actual size, the verifiability of its underlying mining assets and payouts, the source of its high yields, and the full role and disclosure concerning Chris Cook. Blockstream had not issued a comprehensive response at the time of writing.

marsbit3h ago

The Full Story of How Crypto Unicorn Blockstream Is Mired in Serious Fraud Allegations

marsbit3h ago

The Full Story Behind Encryption Unicorn Blockstream's Deep Entanglement in Serious Fraud Allegations

This article details allegations of serious fraud surrounding the crypto company Blockstream, founded by Bitcoin pioneer Adam Back. Investigation account NatInfoSec accuses Blockstream of raising billions through its Blockstream Mining Note (BMN) products, which offer high fixed yields of up to 20% from purported mining revenue. The core allegations are: 1) Blockstream's public mining hash rate (15 EH/s) appears insufficient to cover the massive payout obligations from sold BMN notes, raising questions about the true source of investor payouts. 2) Key executive Christopher William Cook, central to the mining operations, has a prior federal conviction for mail fraud, a fact not disclosed to investors. Cook's background and lavish lifestyle are highlighted as red flags. 3) The structure allows payouts from any source of BTC, not necessarily mining revenue, which critics argue gives it Ponzi-like characteristics. The controversy also touches on Bitcoin Standard Treasury Company (BSTR), a related entity planning a SPAC上市. Critics question whether BMN's liabilities and Cook's record should be disclosed in BSTR's filings. BitMEX Research offered a tempered analysis, confirming Cook's criminal record is likely true and the high yields concerning, but found other claims like insufficient抵押证据 less substantiated. Community debate centers on the need for verifiable proof of Blockstream's mining output and revenue. The article concludes that while fraud is not proven, BMN presents significant, unresolved questions regarding its actual scale, the source of its high fixed returns, the verifiability of its mining operations and payouts, and the full disclosure of associated risks and personnel backgrounds. Blockstream has not yet issued a formal response.

链捕手4h ago

The Full Story Behind Encryption Unicorn Blockstream's Deep Entanglement in Serious Fraud Allegations

链捕手4h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

Hot Articles

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of ETH (ETH) are presented below.

活动图片