Shutterstock photo

In a debate as polarized and divisive as that surrounding Bitcoin it should, I guess, come as no surprise that the significance of news items is frequently exaggerated. When it is something negative, there is never any shortage of mainstream articles from people who miss the irony of being paid in U.S. Dollars to write yet another piece pointing out that Bitcoin is not backed by anything, or maybe that, shock horror, there has been cyber crime involving Bitcoin. These articles frequently make reference to tulips and are greeted with delirium and used as “evidence” by the trolls.

When the news is positive, the normally intelligent Bitcoin community is prone to don its collective blinders and stretch for an implication way beyond what is logically justified. One more merchant, no matter how big, agreeing to accept Bitcoin which they then immediately convert to fiat currency is not particularly significant, nor is naming one of the umpteen college football bowl games for a Bitcoin-related business a game changer. That game’s previous incarnation as the “Beef O’Brady Bowl” didn’t send me in search of a bad steak and it is unlikely that the fans of neither team, nor the gamblers who make up the rest of the audience, were motivated to buy Bitcoin by the name change either.

This week, however, some truly significant positive news did emerge. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) approved the Bitcoin Investment Trust (BIT), a fund based on the currency, as an investment. It is not, however, all good news; BIT is limited to “accredited investors.” An accredited investor, for the record, is defined as an individual with an annual income of over $200,000 and/or $1 million in investable funds, a bank, or another financial institution such as an insurance company.

Despite being graced with a ticker symbol, the ultimate sign of respect from the market, BIT therefore has more in common with a hedge fund than an ETF. The Winklevoss twins are working on an ETF that would be more widely available, though, and while this decision doesn’t guarantee approval of that product, it does make it more likely.

As is always the case with the adoption of disruptive technology, baby steps in a forward direction always beat giant leaps backwards. The fact that FINRA has seen fit to accept that Bitcoin can be viewed as a legitimate currency or commodity, and therefore worthy of a fund based on it, is just such a baby step. Anything that holds out the prospect of increased liquidity and therefore ultimately stability should be welcomed. Until that stability is achieved corporations can hardly be blamed for exchanging Bitcoin as soon as they receive them in payment, and anything that moves closer to the end of that scenario should be welcomed.

Even so, as always, there are some who are not happy. I am not talking here of those who oppose Bitcoin as if their life depended on it. There are some within the community who see this as a negative. Comments have already surfaced along the lines of “...this is all a conspiracy by big finance and their lackey, FINRA, to destroy Bitcoin by making it mainstream.” Once again it seems as if there is a faction who want to keep Bitcoin for themselves, or at least make it only available to those who pass some ideological test.

They are, of course, entitled to their conspiracy theories and opinions but, logically, anything that encourages Bitcoin ownership encourages price stability. That, in turn, moves us closer to the day when the Bitcoin eco-system exists independent of the currency’s value expressed in terms of conventional currency. When we get to that point, Bitcoin will be in a position to fulfill its potential and that is, or should be, the ultimate goal. For now, though, baby steps are welcome.

The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.

The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.