[icu]

IMHO this is a watershed event. It recognizes that Bitcoin has perceived value enough that the regulator is compelled to protect consumers. Never mind how regulation can be gamed internationally, the recognition is so significant I'm going to investigate speculating on Bitcoin's future having kept out so far.

[gamblor956]

In the US, they regulate penny stocks, and those things are only worth a few pennies. The issue isn't the value of the commodity--it's the potential for avoidable loss due to market manipulation.

[wyager]

>they regulate penny stocks, and those things are only worth a few pennies

You understand that the value of something is not tied to the value of its base unit, right?

If you want to be pedantic, the value of a base unit of Bitcoin is about $.000006.

[icu]

Hi, I respectfully disagree with your comment that the issue here is the potential for avoidable loss.

Loss of value is the counterfactual to value, or to put it another way, you cannot worry about avoiding losses until you have something to lose.

The regulator has therefore sent a signal to the market that Bitcoins have value by the virtue of the very regulation it will use to protect consumers from the loss of Bitcoins.

My point is that not all market signals carry equal weight and a market signal given by a regulator is significant.