Polymarket gets backlash over ‘approved’ outcome on $13M Ethereum ETF bet
Polymarket users who lost money by betting against the approval of spot Ether (ETH) exchange-traded funds (ETFs) are crying foul toward the decentralized betting platform, arguing the bet is still on.
One betting market on the blockchain platform saw over $13.2 million worth of bets placed on whether an Ether ETF would be approved by May 31 — but it didn’t exactly detail what “approved” meant.
The market closed at a “Yes” result on May 23, after the Securities and Exchange Commission greenlit the 19b-4 filings for multiple Ether ETFs. Polymarket's logs show the result was briefly disputed but ultimately resolved with the same “Yes" outcome.
But “No” voters argue the call is incorrect, saying a United States ETF needs an approved 19b-4 filing and Form S-1 to start trading on an exchange, and without the S-1 filing, there can’t be a “Yes” result.
Analysts say it could be months before the SEC approves the S-1s, which some “No” voters may have banked their money on.
Prominent “No” bidder “JustKen” — who changed their name to “RevengeTour19B4” after the saga — pointed to VanEck digital assets research head Matthew Sigel’s X post that said “ETFs are not considered ‘approved’” until both the S-1 and “19b-4 filing have been signed off on by the SEC.”
The unhappy punters also pointed to Bitwise investment chief Matt Hougan telling the Unchained podcast that ETFs are a “nuclear key scenario” where an issuer has “to turn” the 19b-4 and S-1 for approval.
Meanwhile, some in the winning “Yes” camp claimed that the market specified “approval,” not that the ETFs had to start trading by May 31.
Related: SEC’s ETF decision means ETH and ’a lot’ of other tokens are not securities
Others argue the SEC’s 19b-4 approvals are counted as final approval, claiming that Form S-1 approvals typically always follow.
Risk Labs, the company behind UMA, a blockchain oracle platform that provides a forum for handling information disputes on Polymarket, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the situation.
Polymarket’s development firm, Adventure One QSS Inc., did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Magazine: Cryptocurrency trading addiction — What to look out for and how it is treated
