【Blockchain Rhythm】There’s a detail that many people in the market haven’t noticed. Why is Morgan Stanley’s move so crucial for Bitcoin? Let’s break it down.
First, let’s look at the issue of market capacity. IBIT, as the fastest ETF in history to reach a scale of 80 billion USD, has set a record. But what does this imply? Morgan Stanley’s judgment is that this is just the beginning. They have sensed that there is still a large unmet demand in the market, especially in attracting new customers. This signal is very clear: we are still in the very early stages, and the future potential is enormous.
The second dimension is social attributes. For financial institutions, Bitcoin is no longer just an economic tool. Morgan Stanley is betting that even if this ETF doesn’t become a blockbuster in the end, simply launching this product can significantly enhance brand value. This is an investment at the social level, not just about returns.
The most critical third point is actually a defensive move. Risks such as platform disintermediation and fee leakage are present. IBIT has already attracted so much liquidity, so why does Morgan Stanley still want to push its own product? Because they have realized a fundamental truth: those who control the distribution channels truly own the customers. Whether the product itself is better is no longer the core issue; whoever controls the customer entry point controls the game.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
17 Likes
Reward
17
6
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
GasFeeGazer
· 10h ago
80 billion is still just the appetizer? Morgan Stanley's recent move was indeed too optimistic; traditional finance is really starting to get involved.
View OriginalReply0
CommunityWorker
· 01-07 03:46
80 billion is just the beginning? What is Morgan Stanley hinting at? How much bigger is the game ahead?
View OriginalReply0
FarmHopper
· 01-07 03:45
80 billion is just the beginning? Morgan Stanley's move is indeed ruthless, truly capitalizing on the window period where traditional finance hasn't yet reacted.
View OriginalReply0
SchroedingerAirdrop
· 01-07 03:30
$80 billion isn't even the ceiling? Is Morgan Stanley trying to extend Bitcoin's lifespan or their own?
View OriginalReply0
SatoshiSherpa
· 01-07 03:28
80 billion USD is just the beginning? Morgan Stanley's move is truly brilliant. It seems that institutions have long sensed what we're still debating about.
View OriginalReply0
ser_ngmi
· 01-07 03:18
Only 80 billion is just the beginning? Morgan Stanley's move is really aggressive. Bitcoin is truly still a new aristocrat.
The real logic behind Morgan Stanley's launch of a Bitcoin ETF: from market size to customer competition
【Blockchain Rhythm】There’s a detail that many people in the market haven’t noticed. Why is Morgan Stanley’s move so crucial for Bitcoin? Let’s break it down.
First, let’s look at the issue of market capacity. IBIT, as the fastest ETF in history to reach a scale of 80 billion USD, has set a record. But what does this imply? Morgan Stanley’s judgment is that this is just the beginning. They have sensed that there is still a large unmet demand in the market, especially in attracting new customers. This signal is very clear: we are still in the very early stages, and the future potential is enormous.
The second dimension is social attributes. For financial institutions, Bitcoin is no longer just an economic tool. Morgan Stanley is betting that even if this ETF doesn’t become a blockbuster in the end, simply launching this product can significantly enhance brand value. This is an investment at the social level, not just about returns.
The most critical third point is actually a defensive move. Risks such as platform disintermediation and fee leakage are present. IBIT has already attracted so much liquidity, so why does Morgan Stanley still want to push its own product? Because they have realized a fundamental truth: those who control the distribution channels truly own the customers. Whether the product itself is better is no longer the core issue; whoever controls the customer entry point controls the game.