RIA
Calvaria: Duels of Eternity
Mentions (24Hr)
0.00% Today
Reddit Posts
Coinbase legal chief sends letter to SEC on RIA rulemaking
BRICS Currencies to Have No Alternative, Former Russian President Medvedev Says
Finiko Crypto Fraudster Caught by Interpol in UAE, Russia Seeks His Extradition
Be careful not to get kidnapped because of your BTC!
Mentions
Wrong. Hong Kong is the safety valve the government of mainland China uses to keep the super wealthy from leaving China. Authorized investors grow their money there through specialized RIA's that are empowered to expose them to the world markets in exchange for capital flight restrictions. There are trillions of dollars in mainland China investor money flowing around Hong Kong.
If you're looking for a more conservative stance, I think you should figure out what your goal is for Bitcoin. Do you want it to be 10% of your portfolio, 20%... etc. I would do 100% into Bitcoin until you get to that percentage and then the split from then on (i.e. 80% s&p, 20% BTC). For what it's worth, outside of my 401k and RIA, I'm like 90% Bitcoin. Will likely switch my Roth IRA to a similar % Bitcoin during the next bear market.
I'm a senior advisor at a fiduciary (RIA), and we said the same thing. That if this was real, they should be able to deduct the fees from the gross withdrawal. Sadly, he did not consult us before investing in this. I've gone to their customer service but they will not confirm the alleged agent that is requesting he send the money without her work ID. This is also fishy to me, as even when I worked at JPMorgan, I could look up an advisor on the other side of the country without requiring an employee ID. My client is sending me screenshots of her texts, and she calls him "Hon" and "Sweetie", which we all know is what legitimate advisors call their clients.
Yes, the Hong Kong ETF is available to "qualified" mainland China investors. These are investors who agree to a certain set of capital outflow rules and include all the Chinese equivalent of our RIA's.
Not a single one of these RIA's holds even 1M worth in Bitcoin. This isn't dipping your toe in, it's dipping the blackened tip of the pinkie nail that I stubbed when I walked into the mantle in the middle of the night last week.
Are you suggesting that people buying NVDA today will outperform people buying BTC today and holding over a 5-10 year period? I sincerely hope you are not a RIA.
People being sold a dream and filling up their RIA’s with this BS.
Can you explain the RIA stuff? I think 90 days should be around 4/11/24, 8 days before the halvening. Does it basically just mean more demand from certain people? Thanks
It has already. Broke ATH BEFORE halving! Market cap made new ATH. RIA’s haven’t even started recommending it to their clients. Institutions haven’t started buying. Superannuation and 401’s haven’t started allocating in their portfolio products yet. Nation states are starting to buy in. There is so much upside to go it’s going to make your head spin. We are all early adopters. We got in before the big guys did. Before Wall St did. Don’t fuck it up!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzkxPUz9RIA
It was a trust. It is better as an ETF because an OTC trust cannot be purchased by most wealth management firms, RIA's, or corporations.
I worked at an RIA and financial advisors are basic glorified salespeople that know basic financial concepts. They are about as experienced as the average investor. I put together excel sheets of asset performance for clients on behalf of the advisor and let me say, they pick terrible investments and have very average returns. Most often worse than the overall market and then charge 1-2% for their less than stellar returns.
Bullish! Other RIA’s likely to follow
I’m an RIA, I have had GBTC is 90% of my 65 client’s accounts since 2018. I have many colleagues who are older and just don’t understand it and don’t recommend it to clients though. I’m sure they soon will though
I’m an RIA and there’s no 90 day waiting period to buy new products. I was already balls deep in GBTC for 90% of my clients anyways before the ETFs came out. But, you’re right that many RIAs have yet to get wet with BTC and they will soon
Those are the independent choices of certain broker-dealers with an IA operation…not a regulatory requirement like what is inferred by OP’s statement. If your RIA won’t talk Bitcoin, here are plenty that will.
It definitely is a possibility but the time frame matters. Let’s assume that feedback is already there, underlying, fine - with just enough time exponential growth accelerates enormously. However, in math you approximate things by the dominant growth. Let me ask again, is MSTR that dominant growth or is it in reality the organic growth that just brought institutional investors in (ETFs), so let’s retirement funds invest (RIA in 60 days) and at some point even more MSTR-playbook companies are infected and at some point even nation states?! That is the dominant growth, it’s the organic. A runaway feedback just from MSTR alone is TOO SMALL on that scale. Hilarious, but it is what it is.
It may not be a literal hold but each RIA has to prove that they have done due diligence before they can recommend. Imagine all the merril lynch guys pacing their offices waiting for compliance to give them a green light. May not be 90 days but the legal beagles will give up money when afraid of liability
I just saw an interesting comment about this. [https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1arpdt7/you\_really\_arent\_bullish\_enough\_on\_bitcoin/](https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1arpdt7/you_really_arent_bullish_enough_on_bitcoin/) "Registered Investment Advisors have a 90+ day waiting period before they can allocate to new investment products. RIAs are watching Bitcoin run, twitching like greyhounds in the race traps, waiting to secure a position for their clients. We are likely going to see RIA inflows hit at the same time as the halving. Meanwhile, MicroStrategy is rocketing even more than Bitcoin. It's up 63% in the past 3 months compared to 46% for BTC. But a MSTR pump is just a delayed Bitcoin pump. u/Saylor will soon be selling more MSTR shares and buying Bitcoin with the proceeds."
RIA rule isn’t true, seems like he got incorrect info from twitter. I’ve seen several ppl say this who have no insight into the fund industry. Platform availability is the key item. Wirehouses like UBS, Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo, Merrill Lynch are biggest 4 platforms. Each require due diligence before allowing on platform (if they ever do). Sometimes that timeframe is 3 years long minimum before allowing product. Once they add to the platform all their advisors can purchase for clients, they can’t buy for clients before then. There are many other tier 2 platforms like LPL, Edward jones, Pershing etc.. probably 50-100 main ones that advisors and other institutional investors use. Each with their own restrictions and each allowed to waive for initial restrictions if they wanted. Or in vanguards case they don’t plan to waive them
I don't know about the RIA but ETF providers have said that major institutions have due diligence requirements and have not, as of today, been buying the ETF. That takes time.
Got a source for the RIA 90 day rule? Would like to read the details but Google isn't helping
Do you have a source for the 90 day waiting period? Googling that and RIA shows nothing like it...
Interesting, I’m not, but the guys who advised my RIA basically told me that section (i) there wasn’t applicable. I am realizing now that we include a note with a lot identifier (it’s like a date and price) when we place an order. That must be the declaration. And we use the transaction history as the confirmation. This was a while ago, but HIFO was critical to us, the lack of a wash sale rule made it quite a game. Anyway, I’ll take your advice and be careful on my own filing, thanks.
Been using Swan Bitcoin for my retirement accounts and have been very happy with their level of service. Step 1. You will have to liquidate current retirement account and have them send the $USD to either a self directed account or a custodial account (that offer bitcoin). You can not send securities to and from retirement accounts so the liquidation is required. From here you have a couple of options… 1. The ETF is an option if you have full faith in the traditional financial system. In this form you do not own bitcoin you own a digital account with a claim to a certain amount of bitcoin from a commingled hoard of the digital asset. Your counterparty risk in this form is quite a lot between the fund issuer (they can also close the fund, fuck up cold storage, many people available to social hack for access, etc.), your financial institution that holds your 401k, your own bank that will need to take in any value that’s liquidated for use (in retirement). This is a great way to attached your buying power of today to the growth of bitcoin over time however you lose most of the benefits of owning the actual bitcoin. 2. Use a bitcoin specific RIA service, like Swan Bitcoin or Unchained’s solutions. Counterparty risk is limited to access your personally owned bitcoin. This is important because Bitcoin is a final settlement layer, it is direct ownership of value. 3. An IRA LLC. This is another form of self directed retirement account through an LLC structure. This will lead to direct ownership of Bitcoin and minimal counterparty risk. When thinking of counterparty risk remember to think long term. Will the be around in 30 years if that’s when you hit retirement age. Good luck!
You are going off of people whose job is to put a high number. To me, I dont give much credence to those - much more in the camp of james lavish, luke gormen, lynn alden, etc. No way of finding out but their job is to set a high bar and happy (secretly) with anything. Like I said, RIA’s money will take months not weeks to get in. Anything above $100k by end of 2024 in terms of price is a win for me. In terms of inflow, anything above $15bn (0.5% of $30trn IRA or 25% of gold market cap) by year end is a win for me
The majority of catalyst behind etf was not retail $, but RIA’s managed assets. RIA takes longer because their firm needs to approve investing into btc etf and that will take few months at the least. Retail (albeit people who knew enough to open up an account in coinbase) always had exposure, just not the boomers
tldr; CBOE Digital President John Palmer believes that the approval of the first Bitcoin ETF in the US will attract institutional investors, including pension and RIA-based funds, to the crypto markets. He suggests that a spot Bitcoin ETF, which allows investment in Bitcoin's price movements without owning the actual asset, will pave the way for these institutions to invest. Palmer also predicts an expansion in Bitcoin derivative products and increased reliance on these derivatives by institutions for risk hedging. Several financial firms are awaiting the SEC's decision on their spot Bitcoin ETF applications by January 10th. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
Please send me the links to the articles where you've read this.. these RIA's can barely get comfortable with BTC which is far more secure and decentralized with literally zero competitors to its consensus mechanism and use case.. ETH is already being disrupted by competitors who do the exact same thing as ETH but cheaper and faster
To provide investment advisory or management services, the person or firm must be a Registered Investment Advisor (RIA) with a license. An investment advisor must review your financial situation and recommend suitable investments appropriate for your risk capacity, investment experience, and risk tolerance. For example, a younger working person can afford to take a greater risk, since they have more years to recover if an investment goes down for a while before recovering. A retired senior citizen cannot afford to lose their life savings in a risky investment since they are no longer working to generate income and they do not have as much time for an investment to recover from a bear market. Senior citizens may be experienced in investing in stocks and bonds, but have no experience with crypto coins and crypto keys. Do a thorough background check before hiring any investment advisor or manager. Look for verifiable proof of experience and performance, not unsubstantiated claims. Where will the crypto assets be stored? Who will have the private keys? Is there a very high level of cybersecurity in place to prevent loss or theft of crypto assets?
You are a little behind the curve here. I work at a $100B+ RIA and the climate is the traditional guys have shifted from disliking to most are now indifferent, and see it as an asset class they need to educate themselves on. I have been shocked at the custody solutions and open mindedness I have seen the past year occurring. There is no question institutions are preparing for broad client interest in adding btc/eth allocations.
It’s the responsibility of the token creators to take their tokens to the SEC/CFTC to have them reviewed to see if they’re a security or commodity. Just like it’s a fund managers responsibility to take their fund to the SEC for review and approval before they can sell the fund to the public through exchanges, broker dealers/RIA, or direct to investor. Coinbase should be asking any token that wants to onboard onto their platform for the SEC filings. Before they list them on their exchange. They’re not responsible for deeming what is or isn’t a security in the US as they’re not the SEC.
> In a split decision Tuesday that may have implications for future crypto regulation, a judge ruled XRP is not a security, but Ripple's activities were not entirely legal. > A federal judge ruled the XRP crypto token (XRPUSD) is not a security, however, XRP promoter Ripple Lab's $728.9 million in XRP sales to institutional customers constituted an illegal securities offering. > Experts say the much-awaited decision in the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's case against Ripple may further complicate crypto regulation going forward. > XRP Token Is Not a Security: > At the heart of the lawsuit filed by the (SEC) against Ripple Labs was the question of whether the XRP token is a security and whether its sale was an unregistered offering in violation of securities laws. The SEC alleged the fintech sold $1.3 billion in unregistered securities to investors. > U.S. District Court Judge Analisa Torres ruled XRP itself is not an investment that "embodies the Howey requirements of an investment contract." The Howey Test is the standard test to check whether a financial product is a security. > Some other distributions of XRP were deemed to not be securities offerings. For example, XRP had also been algorithmically sold on exchanges to unknown buyers and used as compensation for employees and other parties. > XRP price jumped about 56% after the order. > Institutional Sales of XRP Were Securities Offering While some may cheer the decision regarding the XRP token, Judge Torres' decision was a mixed bag for both parties. While the SEC may have lost some ground over XRP not being considered a security, Ripple's $728.9 million in XRP sales to institutional investors constituted an unregistered securities offering. > This number is lower than the $1.3 billion in SEC's original complaint to accommodate for algorithmic sales and disbursal to employees mentioned above. > What's the rationale behind institutional sales being illegal? According to the order, Ripple's claim of XRP acting as nothing more than a currency or utility token cannot stand when many investors signed agreements to not sell their XRP until a specific period of time had passed. > In other words, there was no possibility for these XRP tokens to act as anything other than a speculative investment during these lock-up periods. Additionally, the court also cited investment contracts that explicitly stated the buyer was purchasing XRP "solely to resell or otherwise distribute." > The court order indicates institutional investors purchasing XRP understood they were purchasing the token as an investment based on the efforts of Ripple Labs, which is a key aspect of the Howey Test. > Why Does It Matter? >This decision was much awaited among the cryptocurrency community, especially amid regulatory crackdown by the SEC on platforms such as Binance, Coinbase (COIN) and Kraken for sale of unregistered securities. >But some experts feel that today's order may add more complications to the already unclear rules while others expect litigation to continue. >For example, if the initial sales to institutional investors violated the law, that violation was necessary for the legal secondary sales to occur, according to RIA Lawyers Co-Founder and Partner, Max Schatzow. > "The initial sales only happen so that the secondary sales can happen they serve no other purpose. The founders violate the law in the first instance so that they can have a secondary," tweeted Schatzow. > Consensys lawyer Bill Hughes stated on Twitter that he'd be shocked if the SEC does not appeal the order that was released today. > Additionally, Brown Rudnick Partner Preston Byrne shared his view that today's order was a big loss for the SEC, in addition to sharing his belief that this is not where the court system will eventually land on this issue. > The case will now go to trial to determine the veracity of other claims made by the SEC in their case against Ripple, namely whether Ripple executives aided and abetted in the unregistered offering of XRP to institutional investors.
> For example, if the initial sales to institutional investors violated the law, that violation was necessary for the legal secondary sales to occur, according to RIA Lawyers Co-Founder and Partner, Max Schatzow. It wasn’t necessary though. Going forward this sends the message that ICO’s and institutional sales are no-goes. New projects should begin with selling on the open market only
RIA here. Any market, has at least two classes of participants. The investor class, that cares less about price, and only care about utility, with a deep belief it will affect price eventually. The speculator class, that cares less about utility, and only care about price, with a deep belief it will affect price immediately. Investors build bottoms, speculators find tops. Investors provide market stability, speculators provide market liquidity. Both are needed.
Moneygram, Western Union, RIA...They all feel the danger of Crypto. As well they should. These greedy companies charge up to %5 for a transaction from one country to another. While crypto allows you to do the same transaction basically for free. Usually it's people who work hard and have low income and have families abroad to support, who send these remittances. And they charge them %5 of the amount they're sending. Besides what they gain on the huge spread they have on currencies rate. They wanna keep molesting these people's finances, they don't want them to have an alternative.
tldr; The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has proposed a rule change related to how registered investment advisors (RIA) handle the custody of their client's funds. If passed, the new rules would require that all assets held by an RIA – including crypto – must be entrusted with a “qualified custodian.” *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR. Get more of today's trending news [here](https://coinfeeds.substack.com).*
I’m no expert but I don’t think an exchange would qualify as a “Registered Investment Advisor.” Per Wikipedia: A registered investment adviser (RIA) is a firm that is an investment adviser in the United States, registered as such with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) or a state's securities agency. The numerous references to RIAs within the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 popularized the term, which is closely associated with the term investment adviser. An investment adviser is defined by the Securities and Exchange Commission as an individual or a firm that is in the business of giving advice about securities. However, an RIA is the actual firm, while the employees of the firm are called Investment Adviser Representatives (IARs). Who does this apply to in the crypto space?
This is now one step closer to happening. > The proposal for the rule changes, which are intended to “enhance protections of customer assets managed by registered investment advisors,” was approved in a 4-1 vote by the SEC on Wednesday. If passed, the new rules set the stage for an expansion of the agency’s existing regulations to require that all assets held by an RIA – including crypto – must be entrusted with a “qualified custodian.”
You could try another service apart Western Union. Dolex, RIA, Small world and Viamericas can be found all across the USA and they only cost about $15 to send up to 2k. It is usually at the country of choice within 10 mins and can be sent to almost any bank within the country. Up to $999 is only $10. - I work at a place that uses these services.
You may want to check out $RIA (aRIA currency). BTC fork to mPOS. My humble plug.... 😉
Humble plug for my own coin: $RIA (aRIA currency). We have a lot in the works for 2023. Aside from that, $XRP would be at the top of my list followed by $SHIB. If xrp gets more clients and shib burns more through their ecosystem, both should get you a cool 25% pop. Not financial advice. Just a hunch based on numbers. Good luck.
RIA Novosti and Sputnik, two government owned news agencies write the same article somehow independent from the government? I don't think so.
Fiat, plenty of keys (not crypto keys, but several logins that would give you access to all the customer data and server keys etc…), that needed to be kept secure. Also talking hundreds of millions of accounts with PII including: SSN, account numbers, routing numbers, transaction histories, home address, name, email, phone, tax statements, government issued IDs, the list goes way on. Platform related issues in terms of direct investors placing orders as well client issues from all the fund managers, RIA, and broker dealers we worked with. Which was into the several hundreds in terms of clients and well into the 100,000s in terms of direct investors.
I’m pretty sure if you learn how to recommend products to others that expands your knowledge on how to manage your own money. Also knowing securities laws is an added bonus to your knowledge. I agree registering as an RIA isn’t an ideal route to get accreditor investor status, but it is a work around if someone really wants access to those products. One that you can get through in less than 6 months. I studied for and passed the Series 65 in 3 months while working 50 hours a week between two jobs. It’s totally doable if it’s something you want to have access to. Unless you already have a yearly income of $200,000 for an individual or $300,000 for joint household over a two year period. Then you’d also be an accredited investor regardless of your net worth.
So in lieu of having a million dollars, you have to study to become a registered investment advisor and then maintain an RIA license? Sure, makes sense to me. Over half of the Series 65 test material isn't really about investing your own funds safely, it's about how to recommend products properly to clients and how to run an investment advisory business while following securities laws. By the point you can send your first dollar to a hedge fund, you might as well open up an investment shop.
Except it isn’t a straight income/asset test. Get your Series 65 and register as an RIA, you’re now an accredited investor regardless of income or assets. It costs less than $500 for both the training coursework and exam fee for the Series 65.
There are loopholes to becoming an accredited investor without needing a lot of money. Pass the Series 65 exam, register as an RIA, you’re now an accredited investor. It costs $187 to take the exam. And you can get a live exam prep course from Kaplan for $319. So for $506.00 you can get your accredited investor status. There are even cheaper courses out there, Kaplan is just one of the top providers with a high pass rate for their students. I’ve seen self study exam preps for as little as $15 on sites like Udemy.