Updated market with graduated resolution times and improved resolution criteria:
/Tumbles/will-it-ever-be-true-that-50-of-ame
Note: there are some important clarifications in the comments that aren't in the description, regarding ownership of companies which hold Crypto. These clarifications make it easier for a YES resolution to happen. If you are considering buying NO shares, read comments first.
Resolves YES if a credible argument can be made using solid evidence. With a lot of wiggle room given to the YES side. That is to say, there does not need to be a study specifically targeted at adults aged 30-40. If it seems likely that a majority of adults possess crypto currency, this resolves YES. This market will only resolve NO if it is very clear that the number has never approached 50%.
This only counts if those people generally intend to benefit from possessing the crypto, either from selling it or spending it. If there is a marketing stunt that involves giving a tiny amount of crypto to each American, or something similar, it doesn't count.
This question intentionally does not specify a specific crypto currency. It will count any currency based on the blockchain that fits the spirit of the term "crypto currency" as it is used today.
As I will be judging the question's criteria with a bias towards YES, I will not be allowed to buy YES. However, I will be allowed to buy NO stocks if I so choose. I will not be allowed to sell NO stocks, they will be locked in until resolution.
1,000People are also trading
@BoltonBailey Hey sorry I missed this question before, and just now saw it!
My opinion, on initial gut feeling, is that owning shares in a company (that isn't primarily about crypto investment) that happens to hold bitcoin shouldn't count. However, I think this conflicts with my prior clarifications. It's not quite what I had in mind when I created the question, but I'm inclined to rule that shares in MicroStrategy do count (if I'm correctly assuming that this question is about companies which own Crypto).
It gets tougher once you add that third layer about MicroStrategy appearing in an ETF. So a share of a fund which partially owns a company which bought some crypto. If I had thought of this type of case I would have worded the rules and my clarifications differently, I have a clarification in mind that would bring it in line with my intentions for the market, but at this point I think it would constitute a rule change.
So the answer is YES, that counts for this market. I think I'll make a new market that rules out this case, I'll make it MC as well
@BoltonBailey How does the Funds and Derivatives section of this new market look?
/Tumbles/will-it-ever-be-true-that-50-of-ame
@Undox If it is specifically them who have a legal claim to the ownership of a portion of a specific assortment of coins, then that counts. I think that description describes ETFs. Betting someone on whether or not a cryptocurrency's price will go up without holding the underlying asset doesn't count.
@Tumbles Some questions:
Does "by 2060" here mean "on Jan 1 2060" or "any time before 2060"?
Does owning a Bitcoin ETF count? What if it's owned indirectly, as part of a portfolio that invests in multiple ETFs including a Bitcoin one?
@BoltonBailey Any time before 2060. Owning a bitcoin ETF would count as long as the ETF holds the crypto. Owning indirectly counts. If there comes a day where most Americans have bitcoin in their retirement profile, this market resolves YES.